Tuesday, June 9, 2009

A little politics, Obama and Jesus.

A story on the website POLITICO has a story about how President Obama uses the name "Jesus" and refers to his Christian faith, more often in speeches and in public appearances than G.W. Bush did.
I just thought that was interesting.
Here is a quote from they story, which I liked a lot

David Kuo, a former official in Bush’s faith-based office who later became disillusioned with the president he served, worries that both men have exploited religious phraseology for political gain. “From a spiritual perspective, that’s a great and grave danger,” he said. “When God becomes identified with a political agenda, God gets screwed.”

here is a link to the story on politico
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23510.html

25 comments:

  1. Ahhhhh ha ha ha. What say you, I love being right? God belongs to your party, right? Right?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm sorry, did I ever make a comment like that? I don't believe so. I know many democrats that are Christians.

    But personally I'd like to see the statistics on it -- isn't it funny how Bush got bashed for talking about God, but it's ok for Obama? Interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Funny it doesn't mention where he said the US is not a Christian Nation - and then at a later date said we are one of the largest Muslim nations. (which by the way with only 1 million muslims is not a true statement)

    And refuses to be photographed with any symbol of Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Trying to stir stuff up today?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The more a person talks about how the religous they are, the less I trust them.

    See a "Jesus fish" on the shop door or in an ad and you know that business is going to screw you, all in the name of religion.

    I knew a guy that spent much time telling all how much of a religous person he was, he was even the son of a preacher. This guy was the most worthless two-faced back stabber ever to walk the Earth.

    Obama is using the name of the Lord to try and shroud his inner wickedness.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Not all religous people are that way -- why do you have to generalize people so much?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow, I'm loving the trojan ads on your blog!

    ReplyDelete
  8. One of them got me. I was just trying to help out. It cost me 40 bucks to get it off my comp.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think, and I don't have the facts on this yet, but historically the Democratic party has often been aligned with the church as to human rights and other human relations issues. It has only been since the Regan Era that God seemed to be Co-Opted by the Republican Party. Though I may be wrong on that. To the person who wrote at 1:57 showing ones faith in a business is often a detriment to that business. I have often had people expect me to just give them things or expect me to treat them differently. I can't speak for all business owners, I can only speak for myself. Do you often stereotype people as you did in your comment?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Democratic party has often been aligned with the church as to human rights and other human relations issues. It has only been since the Regan Era that seemed to be Co-Opted by the Republican Party
    >>>
    I think that is about right.
    Remember Jimmy Carter was an overt Christian.
    In the 70s, as a teenager, the dems seemed more "Christian."
    but the point is, either party will use religion when it can.
    Im in the minority there, thinking that the church doesn't need politics.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm with you James. I hate Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hating Jesus and not thinking the church should be political are two different things.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @4:33p.m.
    I don't think that's what he meant. :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yea, cute try.
    Politics does need Jesus.
    Jesus does not need politics.
    Good thing i believe in freedom of speech eh :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Your right James. Jesus does not need politics. And I do not believe that politics alone can resolve our current crisis in this country.

    ReplyDelete
  16. M4M, I see where your are coming from, and agree 100%. It is evident on these blogs what the problem is.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Or this could be the problem

    http://www.theonion.com//content/video/obama_drastically_scales_back?utm_source=a-section

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous said... This guy was the most worthless two-faced back stabber ever to walk the Earth.
    June 9, 2009 1:57 PM

    There are quite a few people who have walked the earth. Whether you beleive the earth is a few thousand or a few million years old, it might be a bit presumptuous to make a declaration about a person's place in "EVER"!.

    That's a whole bunch of people and time to encompass. Ever is a really really long time.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 7:04
    wow, way to break it down. What if I were to say, "It's raining cats and dogs?"

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous said...
    7:04
    What if I were to say, "It's raining cats and dogs?"

    On that topic, we find that the phrase raining cats and dogs dates back to medieval times when the canines and felines slept on the rooftops of the houses.
    A light sprinkle would only wet the pet. However, if there were a heavy rain it would actually cause the animal (cat or dog) to slide off the roof falling to the ground. Hence, the phrase meant it was raining hard enough that the cats and dogs were being washed down or, more concisely, "It's raining cats and dogs."

    Any other questions ro shall we return to the most two faced backstabber ever to walk the face of the earth.

    Any data that correlates with those who may have flown the earth, say like a two faced backstabbing pilot or astronaut? Of course, ever for them would be a shorter time frame since we haven't been flying for EVER!!

    Nice funning with you. Hope you have the greatest day EVER!!

    ReplyDelete
  21. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Your scary.

    ReplyDelete
  22. LOL! Love the raining cats and dogs story!

    ReplyDelete
  23. I thought Obama WAS Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  24. HE IS!!!

    Isn't he?

    ReplyDelete