Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mike McCurry: How My Party Found God (Democrats)[Reports from an alternate universe]
The Daily Beast ^ | December 15, 2008 | Mike McCurry, former Clinton administration press secretary

Posted on 12/26/2008 2:24:21 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet

Liberals have practiced secular politics since the 1960s, but with the ascent of Barack Obama, the left discovered it can actually keep the faith.

When I was a high school kid in 1969, my church youth group leader took a bunch of us to Berkeley in the aftermath of the People’s Park uprising so we could soak in the café scene and experience some of what he was witnessing as a young seminarian at the Pacific School of Religion. The rigid establishment was being overthrown – in politics and the church – and something new in activism was being caffeinated. It would be a long time before that bundle of hormones would sit still again for Bible study.

For the progressive left, social activism grounded in faith and theology crested in the 1960s. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” was maybe the high water mark – a Biblical-based sermon addressed from one black preacher to a group of his white, Southern peers, calling for a radical transformation of perspective on the main social issue of the day.

That history needs to be remembered because faith-based social activism on the left largely disappeared for a generation in the aftermath of the 1960s. Various movements flowered – the antiwar, feminist, and environmental movements – and the action in the streets helped stimulate enormous social change. But organized religion – in the Catholic and mainstream Protestant denominations – began its slow, steady decline in the midst of the social turmoil.

For me, and maybe for many religious kids of the ‘60s, the church lost relevance the more it became a surrogate in the movement for social and political change. Why go to church to learn how to seize political power and change the established order? The more the debates in the pews became secular and political, the more the congregation left the sanctuary in order to put belief into practice.

The result was a long dormancy in which many Democrats became uncomfortable with open expressions of faith. Conservatives became the ones who invoked God and the Bible in the name of their narrow social-political agenda. Their majority was moral and their coalitions Christian and they married faith and political activism in the tradition we now call “wedge politics.”

The liberal faithful fled the scene in favor of latte and Tim Russert on Sunday mornings. Organized expressions of faith were rare at Democratic party gatherings. When I worked at the White House in the mid-1990s, I would not have dreamed of sharing my beliefs on faith with my colleagues. Our prayer and spiritual life was furtive even though we were all drawing on it to make it through rough and trying days. I sat next to George Stephanopoulos for a whole year on the campaign trail in 1996 and never discussed the moral turmoil he writes about in his book, All Too Human. More than once, I inadvertently interrupted Rahm Emanuel’s weekly session with his rabbi as they studied the Torah (yes, that Rahm Emanuel), but it never occurred to me to pull up a seat and join in the conversation.

All that is changing now. In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role as a policymaker. Obama’s campaign benefited from a determined effort – which started during the 2004 campaign and accelerated since – to reach out to communities of faith and let them know that Democrats are their brothers and sisters.

Measuring the political impact of this faith outreach is tricky. It is still true that the more religious Americans who vote are more likely to be Republican and conservative. And it is still true that for most evangelical Christian voters, Democrats are off limits because their leadership does not believe that abortion is an unlawful taking of an innocent human life and that homosexuality is not a sin.

But the real measure of how Democrats succeeded in reaching out to the devout is located in the margins. Indiana is not a state that a Democrat could have carried without connecting in an authentic way to deeply religious voters. In places where Democrats organized real outreach to mainstream Protestant and Catholic congregations, the share of Obama’s vote went up compared to the percentage John Kerry won in 2004.

Connecting to religious people was pretty simple. More than three-fourths of all voters describe themselves as religious, and they are easily interested in how a candidate talks about his or her spiritual life and what it means as they think about the big issues of the day. During the primary season, various forums allowed candidates like Obama, Hillary Clinton, and others to profess their Christian faith and witness to the ways they are called to fulfill scriptural mandates to care for “the least, the last, and the lost.” None of the witnesses those candidates gave was phony: all of them, especially the new president-elect, seemed genuine in describing what the gospel news of Jesus requires them to do as humble servants of God.

So where does this all aim once we inaugurate our new president? For starters, President Obama will need to fulfill promises he made to care about those who suffer at home and around the world. The media and conventional pundits may not know that Obama pledged to end childhood hunger in America by 2015 but a lot of religious people will remember. Those who have volunteered as missions to the poor in developing lands will remember Obama’s promise to double foreign assistance. Those who believe that humankind is uniquely endowed by a Creator God to be stewards of that creation will watch very carefully to see what the new administration does to meet pledges on global climate change. And probably most important: all faith communities believe that war is a violence against God’s promise of shalom and ending the violence of war in favor of the diplomacy of peace will be a critical measure.

Many Democrats are rediscovering the connections that exist between the moral teachings of religion and the things we must do to create a community of the common good here in America. Our nation is entering hard, troubled, and painful times. It’s not a bad thing that the Democrats who are about to inherit positions of power have had a Great Awakening about how their own personal faith speaks to the needs of a dispirited nation in need of a big lift.

**************

Mike McCurry was press secretary to President Bill Clinton 1995-98 and is now a Washington-based communications consultant and a graduate student at Wesley Theological Seminary.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008review; bho2008; billclinton; christianity; churchofoprah; democrats; dncfalseprophets; falseprofits; falseprophets; fauxchristians; frauds; hillary; liberals; obama; obamatransitionfile; obarf; religiousleft; religiousvote
Where to begin?
1 posted on 12/26/2008 2:24:21 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yeah, McCurry and his ‘Rats found god alright, the ‘god of this world’, and it ain’t King Jesus.

Believe that.


2 posted on 12/26/2008 2:26:24 PM PST by mkjessup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I know.


3 posted on 12/26/2008 2:26:37 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

A religious Leftist who cannot understand why the PC crowd have abandoned him...well, since the real intention of the Liberals is a global gulag, not peace and the handout charity they impose on the taxpayer is a trade for politcal power...

Liberals are not religious by design, unless appeasing Islam.


4 posted on 12/26/2008 2:30:24 PM PST by wac3rd (In the end, we all are Conservative, some just need their lives jolted to realize that fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

This just goes to prove - There is NOTHING the Democrats won’t do to gain & retain power.


5 posted on 12/26/2008 2:31:58 PM PST by noah (noah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role as a policymaker.

Uh, memo to McCurry...

Barky couldn't leave the beach for Christmas services this year.

6 posted on 12/26/2008 2:38:51 PM PST by GVnana ("I once dressed as Tina Fey for Halloween." - Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
For me, and maybe for many religious kids of the ‘60s, the church lost relevance the more it became a surrogate in the movement for social and political change. Why go to church to learn how to seize political power and change the established order?

This is what happens when the church preaches leftist revolution - the more "relevant" it becomes, the less relevant it is.

7 posted on 12/26/2008 2:41:25 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role as a policymaker.

What Mr. Mcurry just mentioned so casually here, he would probably never dream of accepting in a conservative Christian politician. In fact, his ilk would be screaming "separation of church and state!" in response to his/her every move.

8 posted on 12/26/2008 2:44:00 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The only god I know that liberals bow down to is environmentalism and the new minister of global warming algore.
9 posted on 12/26/2008 2:45:38 PM PST by Cheerio (Barack Hussein 0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“Where to begin?”

I’ll start.

A shattered economy means the target demo for evangelical religion, middle and southern working class American males, are in for the biggest economic hurt. They’re the ones who work with their hands, and occupy middle management at the retail outfits spiraling into insolvency.

Into this enters Obamaployment, 2-3 million public works jobs. Dream jobs, in terms of wage, benefit and job security. Jobs that by design will go to ... middle and southern working class American males.

They used to be trade unionists. They used to be blue dog democrats. They turned into Reagan Democrats in the 80’s, and Evangelical Republicans in the 90’s.

The bleeding of this demo into both the Evangelical and GOP camps directly correlates with the loss of the original Obamaployment, union protected employment.

When the Dems had nothing left to materially offer this demo, thery came here.

The Dems are ‘finding god’ again because it perfectly wing-tips with the demo they’re trying to lock up again. The GOP/Evangelical demo. OUR demo.

Men will defend their jobs and the economic well being of their families.

This is SUCH a trap. A Democratic Party that’s merged employment with faith politics, against a GOP railing against that employment and telling people they arent religious enough anymore?

These are smart people and they setting up the mother of all 2012 electoral traps, and they arent even in power yet.


10 posted on 12/26/2008 2:48:28 PM PST by skipper18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Great.

Now page us when you’re ready to stop rending babies limb from limb in the name of personal fulfillment.


11 posted on 12/26/2008 2:48:31 PM PST by Philo-Junius (One precedent creates another. They soon accumulate and constitute law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role as a policymaker.”

Faith in what??? Faith in his faith.

Remember what BHO stated when he was asked what was sin “Anyone that go along with MY values”. Quite debased!!!


12 posted on 12/26/2008 2:53:05 PM PST by PORD (People...Of Right Do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
"Separation of church and state" has been their mantra ever since any Christian Republican has been near any office of power. Now, all of the sudden, a screaming left Black Liberation Democrat with Muslim roots takes the reins, it's OK to recommend candidates from the pulpit.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat.

13 posted on 12/26/2008 2:59:41 PM PST by TonyStark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Keep what faith? Faith in what?


14 posted on 12/26/2008 3:03:52 PM PST by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
"Keep what faith? Faith in what?"

Abortion-on-demand, homosexual marriage, drug decriminalization, human-caused global warming, NAMBLA and Soviet-style government, silly!

15 posted on 12/26/2008 3:06:55 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (Barack Obama: In Error and arrogant -- he's errogant!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Black Liberation Theology, in its Founder's Words

Liberals make a religion up to suit their agenda, justify themselves and their appetites. They are not looking for traditional values.

16 posted on 12/26/2008 3:07:39 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role as a policymaker.

As in God D--- America and AmeriKKKa?


----

Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it!
www.AnySoldier.com

17 posted on 12/26/2008 3:08:57 PM PST by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Duh! And all along I thought they were talking about religion and God.


18 posted on 12/26/2008 3:09:24 PM PST by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: skipper18
These are smart people and they setting up the mother of all 2012 electoral traps, and they arent even in power yet.
Glad to see someone gets it. The Obama crew is *smart*. The GOP is going to be the washington generals of politics for the next 20 years unless they get their act together *fast*.
19 posted on 12/26/2008 3:16:18 PM PST by ketsu (It’s not a campaign. It’s a taxpayer-funded farewell tour.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I had no idea that McCurry was such an intellectual and spiritual mess.


20 posted on 12/26/2008 3:29:13 PM PST by Bahbah (Typical white person-Snow white)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
In no way, whatsoever, have the Democrats found God. If they had, the party would not have as a main plank -- the issue of abortion. Addidtionally, they would not want to pass FOCA. Here are the horrifying details of FOCA -- write to your Congressmen and women, please.

S.1173
Title: A bill to protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] (introduced 4/19/2007)      Cosponsors (19)
Related Bills: H.R.1964
Latest Major Action: 4/19/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.


Jump to: Summary, Major Actions, All Actions, Titles, Cosponsors, Committees, Related Bill Details, Amendments

SUMMARY AS OF:
4/19/2007--Introduced.

Freedom of Choice Act - Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.

Prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from: (1) denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or (2) discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively.

Authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action.


MAJOR ACTIONS:

    ***NONE***


ALL ACTIONS:
4/19/2007:
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

TITLE(S):  (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)

  • SHORT TITLE(S) AS INTRODUCED:
    Freedom of Choice Act

  • OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
    A bill to protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.

COSPONSORS(19), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]:     (Sort: by date)


COMMITTEE(S):
RELATED BILL DETAILS:  (additional related bills may be indentified in Status)

    Bill: Relationship:
    H.R.1964 Related bill identified by CRS

AMENDMENT(S):

***NONE***

The actual contents of the bill are as follows:

S 1173 IS

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1173

To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

April 19, 2007

Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mrs. MURRAY, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. CLINTON, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. BAUCUS, and Ms. CANTWELL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


A BILL

To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Freedom of Choice Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:

      (1) The United States was founded on core principles, such as liberty, personal privacy, and equality, which ensure that individuals are free to make their most intimate decisions without governmental interference and discrimination.

      (2) One of the most private and difficult decisions an individual makes is whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy. Those reproductive health decisions are best made by women, in consultation with their loved ones and health care providers.

      (3) In 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479), and in 1973, in Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113) and Doe v. Bolton (410 U.S. 179), the Supreme Court recognized that the right to privacy protected by the Constitution encompasses the right of every woman to weigh the personal, moral, and religious considerations involved in deciding whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy.

      (4) The Roe v. Wade decision carefully balances the rights of women to make important reproductive decisions with the State's interest in potential life. Under Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the right to privacy protects a woman's decision to choose to terminate her pregnancy prior to fetal viability, with the State permitted to ban abortion after fetal viability except when necessary to protect a woman's life or health.

      (5) These decisions have protected the health and lives of women in the United States. Prior to the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, an estimated 1,200,000 women each year were forced to resort to illegal abortions, despite the risk of unsanitary conditions, incompetent treatment, infection, hemorrhage, disfiguration, and death. Before Roe, it is estimated that thousands of women died annually in the United States as a result of illegal abortions.

      (6) In countries in which abortion remains illegal, the risk of maternal mortality is high. According to the World Health Organization, of the approximately 600,000 pregnancy-related deaths occurring annually around the world, 80,000 are associated with unsafe abortions.

      (7) The Roe v. Wade decision also expanded the opportunities for women to participate equally in society. In 1992, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (505 U.S. 833), the Supreme Court observed that, `[t]he ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.'.

      (8) Even though the Roe v. Wade decision has stood for more than 34 years, there are increasing threats to reproductive health and freedom emerging from all branches and levels of government. In 2006, South Dakota became the first State in more than 15 years to enact a ban on abortion in nearly all circumstances. Supporters of this ban have admitted it is an attempt to directly challenge Roe in the courts. Other States are considering similar bans.

      (9) Further threatening Roe, the Supreme Court recently upheld the first-ever Federal ban on an abortion procedure, which has no exception to protect a woman's health. The majority decision in Gonzales v. Carhart (05-380, slip op. April 18, 2007) and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America fails to protect a woman's health, a core tenet of Roe v. Wade. Dissenting in that case, Justice Ginsburg called the majority's opinion `alarming', and stated that, `[f]or the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman's health'. Further, she said, the Federal ban `and the Court's defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court'.

      (10) Legal and practical barriers to the full range of reproductive services endanger women's health and lives. Incremental restrictions on the right to choose imposed by Congress and State legislatures have made access to reproductive care extremely difficult, if not impossible, for many women across the country. Currently, 87 percent of the counties in the United States have no abortion provider.

      (11) While abortion should remain safe and legal, women should also have more meaningful access to family planning services that prevent unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.

      (12) To guarantee the protections of Roe v. Wade, Federal legislation is necessary.

      (13) Although Congress may not create constitutional rights without amending the Constitution, Congress may, where authorized by its enumerated powers and not prohibited by the Constitution, enact legislation to create and secure statutory rights in areas of legitimate national concern.

      (14) Congress has the affirmative power under section 8 of article I of the Constitution and section 5 of the 14th amendment to the Constitution to enact legislation to facilitate interstate commerce and to prevent State interference with interstate commerce, liberty, or equal protection of the laws.

      (15) Federal protection of a woman's right to choose to prevent or terminate a pregnancy falls within this affirmative power of Congress, in part, because--

        (A) many women cross State lines to obtain abortions and many more would be forced to do so absent a constitutional right or Federal protection;

        (B) reproductive health clinics are commercial actors that regularly purchase medicine, medical equipment, and other necessary supplies from out-of-State suppliers; and

        (C) reproductive health clinics employ doctors, nurses, and other personnel who travel across State lines in order to provide reproductive health services to patients.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:

      (1) GOVERNMENT- The term `government' includes a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, or official (or other individual acting under color of law) of the United States, a State, or a subdivision of a State.

      (2) STATE- The term `State' means each of the States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory or possession of the United States.

      (3) VIABILITY- The term `viability' means that stage of pregnancy when, in the best medical judgment of the attending physician based on the particular medical facts of the case before the physician, there is a reasonable likelihood of the sustained survival of the fetus outside of the woman.

SEC. 4. INTERFERENCE WITH REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH PROHIBITED.

    (a) Statement of Policy- It is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman.

    (b) Prohibition of Interference- A government may not--

      (1) deny or interfere with a woman's right to choose--

        (A) to bear a child;

        (B) to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability; or

        (C) to terminate a pregnancy after viability where termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or

      (2) discriminate against the exercise of the rights set forth in paragraph (1) in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.

    (c) Civil Action- An individual aggrieved by a violation of this section may obtain appropriate relief (including relief against a government) in a civil action.

SEC. 5. SEVERABILITY.

    If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which the provision is held to be unconstitutional, shall not be affected thereby.

SEC. 6. RETROACTIVE EFFECT.

    This Act applies to every Federal, State, and local statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act.

END

 

House Bill

H.R.1964
Title: To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] (introduced 4/19/2007)      Cosponsors (109)
Related Bills: S.1173
Latest Major Action: 5/4/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.


COSPONSORS(109), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]:     (Sort: by date)

Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 4/19/2007
Rep Allen, Thomas H. [ME-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Arcuri, Michael A. [NY-24] - 4/19/2007
Rep Baird, Brian [WA-3] - 7/11/2007 Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 4/19/2007
Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 4/19/2007
Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 4/19/2007 Rep Boucher, Rick [VA-9] - 4/19/2007
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 4/19/2007 Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] - 4/30/2007
Rep Carnahan, Russ [MO-3] - 7/16/2007 Rep Carson, Julia [IN-7] - 10/22/2007
Rep Castor, Kathy [FL-11] - 4/23/2007 Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] - 4/23/2007
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 4/20/2007 Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 4/19/2007
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] - 4/19/2007 Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] - 12/5/2007
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 4/19/2007 Rep Davis, Susan A. [CA-53] - 4/19/2007
Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] - 5/2/2007
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] - 7/11/2007 Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 4/19/2007
Rep Emanuel, Rahm [IL-5] - 4/19/2007 Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 3/31/2008
Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] - 5/10/2007 Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 4/19/2007
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 4/19/2007
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep Giffords, Gabrielle [AZ-8] - 6/21/2007
Rep Green, Al [TX-9] - 1/28/2008 Rep Green, Gene [TX-29] - 4/23/2007
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 4/19/2007 Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 1/22/2008
Rep Harman, Jane [CA-36] - 4/19/2007 Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] - 5/2/2007
Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] - 4/19/2007
Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] - 4/19/2007 Rep Inslee, Jay [WA-1] - 4/19/2007
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] - 4/23/2007 Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 4/19/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 4/19/2007 Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [GA-4] - 6/12/2007
Rep Jones, Stephanie Tubbs [OH-11] - 9/4/2007 Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] - 1/28/2008
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 4/19/2007 Rep Lantos, Tom [CA-12] - 4/19/2007
Rep Larsen, Rick [WA-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 4/19/2007
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 5/3/2007 Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] - 4/19/2007
Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] - 5/3/2007 Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18] - 4/19/2007
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 4/19/2007 Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-5] - 4/19/2007
Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] - 4/23/2007 Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 4/19/2007
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 4/19/2007 Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 4/23/2007
Rep McNerney, Jerry [CA-11] - 6/6/2007 Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] - 6/14/2007
Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13] - 4/19/2007 Rep Miller, George [CA-7] - 5/2/2007
Rep Mitchell, Harry E. [AZ-5] - 5/23/2007 Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] - 4/23/2007
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 4/19/2007 Rep Murphy, Christopher S. [CT-5] - 4/30/2007
Rep Murphy, Patrick J. [PA-8] - 9/9/2008 Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] - 6/21/2007
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 4/20/2007 Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 4/19/2007
Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] - 1/22/2008 Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 4/24/2007
Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] - 6/6/2007 Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] - 4/23/2007
Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] - 4/30/2007 Rep Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [MD-2] - 1/29/2008
Rep Sanchez, Linda T. [CA-39] - 4/19/2007 Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-47] - 5/21/2007
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 4/19/2007 Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] - 10/15/2007
Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep Shea-Porter, Carol [NH-1] - 4/23/2007
Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27] - 5/3/2007 Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] - 4/19/2007
Rep Solis, Hilda L. [CA-32] - 4/19/2007 Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 4/19/2007
Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] - 4/19/2007 Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] - 6/18/2007
Rep Thompson, Mike [CA-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6] - 5/3/2007
Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 4/19/2007 Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-5] - 2/12/2008
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 5/2/2007 Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] - 6/6/2007
Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-20] - 4/23/2007 Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] - 4/19/2007
Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] - 4/19/2007 Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] - 4/19/2007
Rep Welch, Peter [VT] - 5/21/2007 Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 4/19/2007
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 4/19/2007 Rep Wu, David [OR-1] - 4/23/2007
Rep Wynn, Albert Russell [MD-4] - 4/23/2007
Rep Porter, Jon C. [NV-3] - 4/19/2007(withdrawn - 4/23/2007)

21 posted on 12/26/2008 3:31:01 PM PST by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role....

Must....find.....pepto....quick....

22 posted on 12/26/2008 3:34:12 PM PST by SteamShovel (Global Warming, the New Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Where to begin?

Let's begin with this ... what god supports abortion?

23 posted on 12/26/2008 3:46:39 PM PST by al_c (Avoid the consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Mike McCurry: How My Party Found (our) God.....Barack Obama.


24 posted on 12/26/2008 3:46:59 PM PST by bpjam (GOP is 3 - 0 in elections after Nov 4th. You Can Smell the Rally !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I use the simple rule of morals. If a person ‘gets’ what abortion truly is, they will be alienated from the RAT party and assume personal responsibilities to help end the monstrosity that it is. If not, they equivocate, delude themselves and remain RATs.

In a similar way, if a candidate or politician ‘gets’ the 2A, then it is reasonable that they can be trusted to respect the rest of the Constitution. If not, they're apt to poison the well we all drink from with their weak-minded blubbering interpretations of our national liberties and safeguards.

25 posted on 12/26/2008 3:56:21 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Leftist kids say the darndest things!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Mike McCurry is about the only Clintonoid not offered an administration post by Obama,... at least until now.


26 posted on 12/26/2008 4:08:20 PM PST by rod1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

So, uhh, how many times has this man of “strong religious faith” gone to church since he got elected?


27 posted on 12/26/2008 4:09:36 PM PST by kaehurowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skipper18
Excellent post!

If the Obamanation can offer this demograph faith and family, then this demo will be hard pressed to vote against him. The faith will be faux faith of course, nice sounding terms, but in practice really nothing more than feel-good talk and “programs”. The family will be economic support for their wife and kids via union protected jobs or WPA like make work. And who can blame them?

Selling free-market principles and faith that has failed to deliver much in fixes to our social problems (gay marriage, abortion, secular schools) is a difficult task. Of course in the long run it will fail, but it is all about the next election isn't it ....

schu

28 posted on 12/26/2008 4:15:50 PM PST by schu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
For starters, President Obama will need to fulfill promises he made to care about those who suffer at home and around the world. The media and conventional pundits may not know that Obama pledged to end childhood hunger in America by 2015 but a lot of religious people will remember.

So in a mere 7 years, the messiah will end childhood hunger when we have had this problem for eons

29 posted on 12/26/2008 4:25:14 PM PST by Popman (Dont worry Barney Frank has your ass-ets covered!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
In Barack Obama, Democrats have put forth a man of strong religious faith who is comfortable connecting his spiritual life to his public role as a policymaker.

Is Black Liberation Theology truly a religion? Frankly, I haven't seen any true evidence that President Soetero is religious in any way. Going to church each Sunday doesn't make one religious, especially a nutty, hate-filled BLT church.

30 posted on 12/26/2008 5:24:39 PM PST by Major Matt Mason (You can't shame the shameless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: noah

Amen.


31 posted on 12/26/2008 9:21:52 PM PST by victim soul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson