Would an endorsement you don't like change your mind about your candidate?
McCain faces fire over minister's views.
Obama's UCC membership could be a thorny issue.
Hillary Clinton's "double standard."
The North Carolina Piedmont Triad's top go-to source for News
A service of the News & Record, Greensboro, North Carolina
« In the thick of things: missionaries | Main | Was Moses simply ... high? »
McCain faces fire over minister's views.
Obama's UCC membership could be a thorny issue.
Hillary Clinton's "double standard."
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Interesting link on Barak O's membership in the United Church of Christ. So it seems that as far as Republican strategists are concerned, being Christian and talking openly about one's faith isn't enough. One has to be fundamentalist and virtually reactionary in order to be considered "Christian enough" to be taken seriously.
This is obviously a game that has long been fixed, and it's about time the politicians of this country figured out that it's leading America down a path of hatred and self-loathing that our children will long regret us taking.
Posted on March 3, 2008 6:58 PM
At least 90% of all this hubub is just plain ol' politickin'. The media loves it, and eats it up voraciously.
I'd say that Obama and McCain are even now. Each has had a less than milk-sop figure endorse them, each controversial in his own way. If either of these endorsers had taken even a milisecond to think, they would have realized that THEIR endorsement would not achieve the goal they wanted: to enhance the candidates chances of winning the election - just the opposite. But I guess they are both so caught up in their little world of self-importance that they could not be so clairvoyant.
American politics is a very starnge and wonderful world indeed. Nothin' like it.
OTOH, people are far more aware these days that ideas have consequences than they once were, and are more and more concerned about the ideological bent of a candidate. Christians, in particular, are struggling as to how to insure that their faith commitments are translated into conrete laws and policies (as is everyoen else).
Having been jilted by Jimmy Carter and let-down by GW, they want a more straight-forward and sincere confession of faith from their candidate. Problem is, they forget that this is not testimony time at the Wednesday evening prayer meeting, but the pandering and smoke-and-mirrors world of modern American hollowtics.
Both Obama AND McCain are right: they cannot control the entire ideological scope of an endorser. But, the media just can't resist these juicy little tales. Personally, I say let's get on with the show. Real issues and substantive debate, please!
Posted on March 3, 2008 8:59 PM
Nikos said: "I'd say that Obama and McCain are even now."
Well, except that McCain solicited Hagee's endorsement, appeared at a rally with him, and spoke of him in glowing terms, while Obama did not solicit Farrakhan's endorsement, has not appeared with him, and has spoken of him only to denounce his anti-semitic comments. Other than that, though, it's as you say -- they're even.
Posted on March 4, 2008 6:17 PM