Barack Obama (D-Ill) has had the aura of the anointed for the next presidential election ever since his impressive speech at the 2004 democratic national convention. His message resonated with many in the center who saw an increasingly religious country feeling alienated by the perceived secular platform of the Democrats (at least that's how they've been branded by conservative pundits.) Obama went out of his way to show how Democrats can have the same zeal for old time religion that Republicans had been flaunting at every opportunity in an attempt to pull some of the evangelical Christian vote (evangelicals are thought to make up over 20% of the electorate and were very effective at getting voters to show up at the polls.) Even since Democrats won the midterm elections Obama has been following the same course. Unfortunately, evangelicals may not be responding.
Obama's efforts are running into fierce resistance. For instance, an open letter from a group of Christian-Right figures _ including Phylis Schlafly, Tim Wildmon and others _ criticizes the invitiation by citing Obama's pro-choice stance and his support for condom distribution in answer to the AIDS epidemic, "not chaste behavior as directed by the Bible." The letter ends, "No, Mr. Warren, Mr. Obama, we will never work with those can support the murder of babies in the womb."
Then there's this press release from the National Clergy Council, an umbrella group representing various conservative denominations. In the release, Rob Schenck, president of the group, did not mince words: "Senator Obama's policies represent the antithesis of biblical ethics and morality, not to mention supreme American values."
This puts Obama in something of a bind. He wants to keep wooing evangelicals over to the Democrats, as he and many other Democratic strategists are afraid of a repeat of 2004, when the bible beaters bashed Democrats into conservative submission. But he can't do that if he continues to support a woman's right to choose, a staple position of just about everyone in the Democratic party. And there's no way in hell that he'll ever get the 2008 nomination (or even reelected to his senate seat) if he switches to an anti-choice stance.
But perhaps the dilemma is a false one. The Democrats managed to stomp on their Republican opponents in 2006, and without the support of evangelicals who mostly stayed home in disgust. So Obama's choice seems clear, and it's one that his Democratic brethren should emulate: fuck evangelicals. They're the ones who were pushing for such worthless issues as flag burning amendments and gay marriage and the fictitious war on christmas to clutter up the congressional agenda. This year actual issues like the war in Iraq, the economy and the GOP's assault on civil liberties motivated voters to put the Democrats back into power, despite Karl Rove's failed attempts to use the gay marriage "wedge issue" to distract voters. So screw them. Forget about them, and for God's sake, don't pander to them. Stick to the issues and hopefully people will continue to vote with their heads instead of their asses and support the Democrats, and Obama.
Placing doubt in the mind of evangelicals is a good thing, especially if the doubt is whether to continue supporting the Republicans. Splintering the evangelical vote is the Democratic key to winning the upcoming presidential election. If our candidates can appeal to evangelicals without compromising our core values, then we will have achieved our goal.
There are many Christians out there who want a way to vote Democratic without compromising their values. If we can meet them even part way on some issues, it will tip the balance in our favor. It seems that in recent presidential elections, just a few percentage points separate the winners from the losers. We gained a great deal of momentum from the recent congressional elections. Let's not fritter it away like the Republicans did with Iraq and their generally corrupt nature.
However, I think what Mr. Obama is doing is important. Polite communication, a discussion of practical ideals...that's something to get behind. The evil partisan behavior that gets all the attention isn't good for anyone in the long run.
Holden_Caulfield said:
There are many Christians out there who want a way to vote Democratic without compromising their values. If we can meet them even part way on some issues, it will tip the balance in our favor.
There are some, certainly. But there are also far too many who won't budge on key issues like abortion and gay rights. That's primarily what I was speaking to - these voters should just be written off, because you'll never please them as much as the Republicans will, but you'll alienate the rest of the voters by trying.
Huge Shithead said:
...criticizes the invitiation by citing Obama's pro-choice stance and his support for condom distribution in answer to the AIDS epidemic, "not chaste behavior as directed by the Bible."
I love how these people think that promoting "chaste" behavior is the answer to the AIDS epidemic--as if just letting people know that 'ol JC doesn't want 'em fuckin' outside of marriage will immediately stop extra-marital sex.
Y'know, like how it worked in American teens.
(Funny thing, I tried to capitalize America a few times, but fucked it up repeatedly, I began to suspect that the SG forums may just have a thing against America.)
PS - It was surprisingly difficult to get "Huge shithead" to show up in the such and such said: bit at the top of the quote, I think I deserve some sort of medal.
Barack Obama is the only possible candidate I feel I can vote for in 2008 without having a bad taste in my mouth. Come on Democrats! Don't fuck this up!
It's a shame he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning.
Plus, he's still kinda young, I'd actually prefer he wait a few years before running, both so he can gain experience, and be recognized as havign more experience.
I love Ombama, but he'd better not go after the Jesus freak vote too zealously, lest he lose credibility from his core supporters by appearing to 'sell out' and become some kind of politician.
x
Holden_Caulfield said:
There are many Christians out there who want a way to vote Democratic without compromising their values. If we can meet them even part way on some issues, it will tip the balance in our favor.
There are some, certainly. But there are also far too many who won't budge on key issues like abortion and gay rights. That's primarily what I was speaking to - these voters should just be written off, because you'll never please them as much as the Republicans will, but you'll alienate the rest of the voters by trying.
I'm not American, but the principle is sound: affect the voters whose minds you can change.
We (the dems) would do better if we just figured out a way to get OUR vote out. We know there are a hell of a lot of Democratic voters who aren't voting. We need a better machine, like the one the 'Pubs built in the past 12 years. Then we need to not IM pages or fly to Scotland for golf and stuff.
IPOD
RADIO
legionnaire
United Kingdom
November 2003
NOV 28, 2006 09:51 PM