Skip to comments.How Barack's winning the evangelicals
Posted on 12/29/2006 7:14:59 AM PST by teddyballgame
Like a dutiful dancing partner, Senator Barack Obama has begun courting the evangelical right, and some are already waltzing along in perfect time.
With his attendance at Rick Warrens church, Saddleback Valley Community, a mega-church in California for a large conference about AIDS, Obama has begun to align himself with an important base of voters to gain what conservatives lost this last year. Already lauded by some prominent evangelical publications for his outstanding "Christian faith" and a person Rick Warren called a "good friend" and a someone he'd like to work with on important issues, Obama is in perfect position, if he can keep the momentum, to use an unusual strategy for political gain.
Obama has become well-known not only for his charisma and sudden rise to fame in the last few months, but for his outspoken Christian faith to which he refers regularly.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I guess some do when it's dressed in sheep's clothing.
The "but" is that, realistically, there are going to be a lot of decent folks that are gonna be dropping like flies, easy prey to paid pros "who do this for a living."
these would be the same Evangelicals who supported Clinton... and there were enough of those... the thing is, Obama isn't even from the Bible belt...
A little leaven leavens the lump.
This is probably going to be an unpopular thing to say, but objectively the ones who are going to be best prepared to deal with them are probably going to be the evolutionists who've managed to survive the crevo wars.
LOL. Thanks a lot. :)
don't forget to read this...
LOL. Just make sure you're not drinking yonder coffee when reading some of Terriergal's posts who almost caused a big mess a minute ago.
It's pretty much a guarantee the MSM won't tell folks
Just like how the NOW Hags and NARL didn't say a peep about Bob Casey, Jr. and his so-called pro-life stance
Qatch out! He's come too soon and fast. Thanks to the media. First the media then the mega churches. That's the way to work it, publicity then the mega church coffers. SMART MOVE.
You might be right, I don't know. Time will tell, I guess.
Speaking (soley) for myself, I plan on taking a sabbatical when it starts getting ugly. I'm nearly sixty, I'm in lousy health, I have a year and a half old son with some potentially serious health issues (yeah, I robbed the cradle when I married my young wife), and my life is just too short for the kind of crap I see coming down the pike.
It ain't gonna be pretty, that's for sure.
Not true.I work with many died in the wool black evangelicals and almost all are vote a straight Dem ticket.
Those nasty Republicans are just SOOO racist!
At least thats their consensus.
One of the chapters in Alan Colmes (Hannity & Colmes) was Jesus would be a liberal and why.
Now it makes sense. I guess if I had a TV I would have gotten it.
Let's hope they don't get intimidated by his larger than life persona and hordes of followers.
He sure is, and you should hear how Slick Rick "I'm not a politician" Warren gushed about Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright. "One of the great uh Godly preachers in the black church and uh so I know he's got soul cuz he's got a good pastor."
(I guess by that reasoning we can assume all the people at Ted Haggard's church are sexual perverts addicted to illegal drugs.)
Not a word against the UCC, nothing... !!!
Rick Warren on Tucker LAME interview!!! What a weasel!!! He dodges the very first question like a pro politician. He repeats every mantra he's come up with this last month since Farah started in on him (THANK YOU JOSEPH FARAH!). He doesn't have one original idea in his head.
"Have you talked with Senator Obama?"
"Of course, he knows exactly how I feel" (about issues we disagree on)
Well that's very nice that you feel that way Rick, if you're not going to publicly say anything about it and speak out against anyone except those who criticize YOU. It makes it kind of look like butchering babies isn't quite as bad an offense as questioning the great Rick Warren.
Water-borne eye diseases? That's his next project?
NOTE: He references the public message "Why we do what we do" which is available on purposedriven.com, which has been altered to remove any reference from the Syria video. I have seen both versions. Here is the segment from the middle of the message (different service that day, same message) where the Syria video was shown. You can see the edit after "I wish I could take you with me on those missions trips" etc. in the public version.
It's a personal thing - by Steve Taylor (The press conference) It's a personal thing, and I find it odd
you would question my believing in a personal God
I'm devout, I'm sincere, ask my mother if you doubt it
I'm religious, but I'd rather not get radical about it
the old-time believers had timidity and grace
but this new generation doesn't know its place
you're entitled to believe, but the latest Gallup Poll
says you mustn't interfere--that's the government's role
'Cause when you throw your hat in the bullring
before you know it's a personal thing
and when he comes to the day of reckoning
he's gonna tell 'em, "uh, uh, uh, it's a personal thing"
(The nomination speech)
It's a personal thing, and I boldly state
that my views on morality will have to wait
'til my personal life's out of the public eye
and the limitations statue can protect my alibi
I'm devout, I'm sincere, and I'm proud to say
that it's had exactly no effect on who I am today
I believe for the benefit for all mankind
in the total separation of church and mind
(The victory night)
It's a personal thing, and I plainly speak
(from the same code of ethics that I held last week)
as I promised if elected this election day
with the help of God almighty...I'll do it my way
'Cause when you throw your hat in the bullring
before you know it's a personal thing
and when he comes to the day of reckoning
HE's gonna tell him, "hey, back off buddy, it's a personal thing."
Ever since Rick Warren dissed Fundamentalists I've figured out I'm a fundamentalist and not Evangelical. Big hearted Rick who preaches about loving annoying people like Jesus would, lumps us 'fundies' in with terrorists as one of the biggest enemies of the 21st century.
Getting us kicked out of my church (for rebuking our Warren-emulating pastor-weasel) was the best thing I ever did!
They don't. But many of them are suasible suckers and credulous chumps.
If I may ask.. uh... why?
Go back and read it again and pretend you're totally ignorant about sin, the sovereignty of God, his holiness, your depravity, etc., what happens when you die, mormon or JW or even some other religion. And see if it's as good as you once thought. See if there's anything in there that challenges you to leave that behind, repent of your sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ who willingly suffered to pay for your sin, *before* it says you're a part of God's family. Try very hard to find the gospel in it. You won't.
Let me clue you........evangelicals want NOTHING to do with this empty suit.
What Pastor Warren's real sin was he went to Syria and made some perfunctory positive remarks about the regime full well knowing the Christians from Iraq have found sanctuary in Syria. Admittedly, Syria and Assad are not open minded and tolerant but they have give sanctuary of a sort.
Noing virtually nothing about the land or history, Warren allowed himself to be used as a spokesperson for the Pan-Arab Nationalists. This is the same regime that ended Christian rule in Lebanon.
Warren is a useful idiot or dhimmi.
What's your excuse?
The problem for the Israeli Bots is 80% of the nonobservant Jews vote RAT and one can not turn around without some nonobservant suing some little town or city for having a creche' in the town square.
So you hate Israel because of the actions of non-observant Jews. Has it occured to you that many of these liberals and leftists have the same opinion on Israel that you do and that you are helping them?
Also, shall I hate Christian countries for the actions of atheists who were born Christian?
The Israeli BOTs IMHO are about to face a come uppance. Wanting Israel to succeed does not mean we have to hate either Muslims or Arabs. Further, there is increasing concern about the anti-religious efforts of nonobservant Jews--richos especially including Soros on down. We know who yor are!
YOu are a sadly ignorant person.
1. The Muslims have been at war with Jews and Christians since 622 CE.
2. Soros hates israel. The former Arrow Cross youth member, who spent World War 2 stealing Jewish property, now pretends to be Jewish so he can creat anti-Zionist groups that claim to be Jewish.
He remains a toady for the Nazis.
That iodiots like you hate Jews for his actions is icing on the cake.
That's funny, I never heard Obama claim to be a Christian. All that I have heard from him is that he was exposed to Christianity, while living with his grandmother (while attending a Catholic high school. Up until high school, Obama attended Sunni Muslim madrassahs from an early age, both in Hawaii and Indonesia, where his mother was living with her second Muslim husband. In other words, Obama is a Muslim. Once a Muslim always a Muslim and after all those years of radical Islamic brainwashing, Obama could never become a Christian. They would kill him (literally). If you have any doubts about a Muslim leaving the faith, read America Alone, by Mark Steyn.
well, did they do and say those things are not?
Why do you blame Israel for an anti-Israel activist like Soros?
NEW YORK, Nov. 7 (JTA) -- It's not often that George Soros, the billionaire financier and philanthropist, makes an appearance before a Jewish audience.
It's even rarer for him to use such an occasion to talk about Israel, Jews and his own role in effecting political change.
The UK Online URL is: "http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/03/11/JTA071103.html"
So when Soros stepped to the podium Wednesday to address those issues at a conference of the Jewish Funders Network, audience members were listening carefully.
Many were surprised by what they heard.
When asked about anti-Semitism in Europe, Soros, who is Jewish, said European anti-Semitism is the result of the policies of Israel and the United States. "There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that," Soros said. "It's not specifically anti-Semitism, but it does manifest itself in anti-Semitism as well. I'm critical of those policies."
"If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish," he said. "I can't see how one could confront it directly."
That is a point made by Israel's most vociferous critics, whom some Jewish activists charge with using anti-Zionism as a guise for anti-Semitism.
The billionaire financier said he, too, bears some responsibility for the new anti-Semitism, citing last month's speech by Malaysia's outgoing prime minister, Mahathir Mohammad, who said, "Jews rule the world by proxy."
"I'm also very concerned about my own role because the new anti-Semitism holds that the Jews rule the world," said Soros, whose projects and funding have influenced governments and promoted various political causes around the world.
"As an unintended consequence of my actions," he said, "I also contribute to that image."
After the conference, some Jewish leaders who heard about the speech reacted angrily to Soros' remarks. "Let's understand things clearly: Anti-Semitism is not caused by Jews; it's caused by anti-Semites," said Elan Steinberg, senior advisor at the World Jewish Congress. "One can certainly be critical of Bush policy or Sharon policy, but any deviation from the understanding of the real cause of anti-Semitism is not merely a disservice, but a historic lie."
Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called Soros' comments "absolutely obscene."
"He buys into the stereotype," Foxman said. "It's a simplistic, counterproductive, biased and bigoted perception of what's out there. It's blaming the victim for all of Israel's and the Jewish people's ills."
Furthermore, Foxman (right) said, "If he sees that his position of being who he is may contribute to the perception of anti-Semitism, what's his solution to himself -- that he give up his money? That he close his mouth?"
ASSOCIATES said Soros' appearance Wednesday was the first they could ever recall in which the billionaire, a Hungarian-born U.S. Jew who escaped the Holocaust by fleeing to London as a child, had spoken in front of a Jewish group or attended a Jewish function.
The one-day meeting on funding in Israel, which took place at the Harvard Club in New York, was limited mostly to representatives of Jewish philanthropic foundations.
After Soros' speech, Michael Steinhardt, the real-estate magnate and Jewish philanthropist who arranged for Soros to address the group, said in an interview that Soros' views do not reflect those of most Jewish millionaires or philanthropists.
He also pointed out that this was Soros' first speech to a Jewish audience.
Steinhardt approached the lectern and interrupted Soros immediately after his remarks on anti-Semitism.
"George Soros does not think Jews should be hated any more than they deserve to be," Steinhardt said by way of clarification, eliciting chuckles from the audience.
Steinhardt then gave the lectern back to Soros, who said he had something to add to his remarks on the issue of anti-Semitism. Soros then paused to ask if there were any journalists in the room.
When he learned that there were, Soros withheld further comment.
Mark Charendoff, president of the group that hosted the conference, said he was pleased overall with the Soros event.
"We found him to be enormously frank, candid and generous with his time," Charendoff said. "I would be delighted if Mr. Soros would bring his passion, his brilliance and his resources to a range of different causes that are important to the Jewish community."
Charendoff is not alone.
Regardless of what they think of his politics, most Jewish activists likely would welcome Soros' participation in the world of Jewish philanthropy. Though he's ranked as the 28th richest person in the United States by Forbes magazine -- with a fortune valued at $7 billion -- Soros has given scant money to Jewish causes.
Soros' first known funding of a Jewish group came in 1997, when his Open Society Institute's Emma Lazarus Fund gave $1.3 million to the Council of Jewish Federations, and when Soros gave another $1.3 million to the Jewish Fund for Justice, an anti-poverty group.
As much as Jews may not like what Soros has to say -- at Wednesday's meeting, he called for "regime change" in the United States and talked of funding projects in "Palestine" -- they are eager to get Soros involved in giving to Jewish causes.
"In many ways, this was an introduction for Soros," Charendoff said. "He remarked to me how impressed he was with the quality of the people he met. We can only hope that this was a beginning of an engagement with the Jewish funding world."
Soros said he has not given much to Jewish or Israel-related causes because Jews take care of their own, so that his financial clout is better directed elsewhere.
Steinhardt tried to correct him on that point, saying the field of Jewish giving is not as crowded as Soros thinks.
"Even if we were a crowded field," Steinhardt told Soros, "I'm sure we could make room for you."
During his speech, Soros announced that he would support the "Geneva accord," an unofficial Middle East peace plan proposed by two out-of-office politicians, Israel's Yossi Beilin and Palestinian Yasser Abed Rabbo.
That plan envisions two states along pre-1967 borders and a shared Jerusalem, and is vague on the demand that Palestinian refugees from 1948 be allowed to return to Israel.
It was not clear whether Soros' support of the plan would involve funding. Beilin's office did not return a call seeking comment.
The parts I have underlined are the unofficial, but common, position of the RAT party in Minnesota. Incidentally, this includes almost all nonobservant Jews. It would seem Soros's position of 2003 has prevailed in the Jewish community as well as in the gentile community. So why are you mad at me and President Bush for being against further West Bank settlements?
One answer is you wish to convince us. Calling us antisemites or ignorant of the issues is no longer working. You have a Jewish political dispute here and an Israeli Arab problem there.
Like it or not Soros's positions in 2003 are currently the positions of Minnesota RATS and the 80% of the nonobservants who always vote for RATS.
He didn't defeat President Bush, but he did almost eliminate support for Israel's present borders on the Left and has made inroads on the right.
That is reality. Calling people names or impugning their integrity will not change what has happened and what seems to be happening.
President Bush does not intend to support more West Bank settlements. Indeed, he condemns them. His party will follow and the RATS are assuming far more serious consequences for Israel. In the meantime how is Olmert doing?
Considering what a disaster the IL GOP is in - Keyes is lucky he got 27% of the vote. Maybe had he actually been from IL the result might have been a bit different; however IL is a liberal state. Furthermore, Keyes has never held an elected office; whereas BHO was a state Senator. That type of thing holds a lot of weight for people.
I should have clarified my statement-however I thought it was clear that we were talking about Evangelicals-so I didn't believe that it needed to be stated in my response.
Evangelicals/conservative Catholics usually vote for pro-life candidates - some of them overlook party to vote for pro-life candidates...Pro-life Dem is better than a pro-choice Republican....even if the Republican represents a lot more of your values than the pro-life dem would....
So, for this group, the pro-lifer IS going to win over the pro-choicer-especially if they are a single-issue voter - which a significant portion of evagelicals are on the issue of abortion.
Making the assumption that the pro-lifer would automatically win against a pro-choicer outside of evangelical circles is absurd because we know that relatively conservative areas will elect pro-abort candidates. My state just re-elected our pro-abort gov and MI isn't nearly as liberal as NY.