Obama affirmatively wants to kill as many babies as possible
I don't think anyone has ever made that claim. Obama wants the abortion license to be as widespread and open as possible, even to the point of letting babies who have the audacity to survive abortion attempts die of neglect, which is bad enough. But no one ever said he wanted to kill babies that a woman decides to keep. At least I haven't heard him say that yet.

SDG,
P.S. I was asking you about the 'harshness' thing to find out whether you thought my post was indeed harsh. I don't mean it to be taken as a challenge for evidence, or an emblem of an offense received. I'd just like to know if one reader (representing many) found my comments jerky.

opps.

SDG,
I'm not sure it's fair to say that Obama is "inventing a Church" or "subverting true Christianity."
Fair enough. Here's what I mean to say:
Obama 'requires' allegiance to political ideals which his rhetoric suggests he believes are supremely and incontrovertibly central to Christianity. These include socialists policies and unmitigated protection of access to abortion. This is foreign to Christianity as you and I know it. He hides the fact that he is a cut and dried far-left pro-abort under amorphous slogans and feel-good fuzziness which mean little grammatically and nothing philosophically when read in dispassionate PDF format. :-) This is why I think Barack Obama is attempting to foist his politics down the throat of Faith.
I do find the particular form of religiosity associated with his candidacy troubling. Of course the same could be said of the religiosity of the Bush administration.
Interesting comparison. I think the difference is that GWB hopes to give his politics the stamp of faith, while Barack Obama seems to follow the reverse path. It's all a little vain, no? :-)
(I'm afraid you'll find me maddeningly noncommittal and equivocal on the subject of partisan politics.)
I don't know about the 'maddening' part. I don't mind it when someone is wise enough to avoid politics as much as I mind it when someone is silly enough to think it's always obligatory. :-)

David B,
I shouldn't have written that. Perhaps I should have said "Maybe some of the harshness has been unwarranted." It isn't my intention to judge anyone in this thread, including you. At any rate, anger and harshness are two different things, and either can be warranted or unwarranted, as can strong disagreement.
I'm not sure it's fair to say that Obama is "inventing a Church" or "subverting true Christianity." I do find the particular form of religiosity associated with his candidacy troubling. Of course the same could be said of the religiosity of the Bush administration. (I'm afraid you'll find me maddeningly noncommittal and equivocal on the subject of partisan politics.)

BTW,
SDG, I'd really like to know if you were referring to my posts as "harshness in this thread [that was] unwarranted." 'Cause I don't mean anger to be felt through the posts, and that isn't my intention.

Margarita,
How are my posts uncharitable? There are hard on BO, but I think they are warranted. Just anger is just. BO is inventing his own form of false Christianity, where 'hope' and 'change' are the chief virtues. Behaviors which the First person of the Blessed Trinity condemned through Moses and the Prophets and which were not condoned by Christ are guarded jealously by Obama. He seems to want to bring the Church into the State, and have it informed and 'sanctified' by the State. This is inventing a Church, and subverting true Christianity.
If you disagree, fine. But my disagreeing with BO isn't uncharitable. It is simply strongly disagreeing with what I know to be sinful. I'm not about to sit back and watch a guy lead my country to someplace far away from God.

I think it's fair to say that some of the harshness in this thread has been unwarranted.
Just to clarify, no one appointed me thread cop. I just thought the irony was too good to pass up.
For what it's worth, I would agree that Obama's flyer is ham-handed and generally unappealing -- just not a calculated assault on Christianity.
Cheers.

You have to admit, deliberately subverting faith, hope, and charity could be construed as a somewhat sinister interpretation.

Well, "subverting" is my word; by "deliberate" I didn't mean to imply that the Obama campaign thought of themselves as "subverting" anything, only that that's my take on their deliberate appropriation of the theological virtues.
I think it's fair to say that some of the harshness in this thread has been unwarranted. I think it's still pretty restrained compared to the way lots of Obama's supporters talk about Bush. Then again, Obama hasn't actually done much of anything yet, so that's apples and oranges. I'm just saying.

No. I didn't refer above to any comments that merely disagreed with or lamented Obama's politics, as opposed to those ascribing to him bad-faith or sinister motives based on the flyer.

Does "dearth of charity" mean="People disagree with me"?

"F'rinstance":
... Kinda comes off like cult leader in that photo.
... I think it's fitting that they replaced "Charity" with "Change." A Freudian slip, no doubt.
... easy to believe that they're deliberately subverting the better-known trio.
... he is trying to invent his own form of Christianity, ... in which 'Hope,' his motto, is the end goal of all people.
... he proclaims that it's his mission from God to be president!
... While She-who-must-not-be-named is running for White Witch, Obama is running for Antichrist. [!]
... it is an ever so subtle point that in the end it's all about Obama. Not his faith, or what change he is going to make... it's all about the "I"
You have to admit, deliberately subverting faith, hope, and charity could be construed as a somewhat sinister interpretation. I just think that the simple explanation is the most likely -- a lot of people have been convinced that Obama is a Muslim, and he needs to address that. I do take the point that playing on a Biblical reference will rankle some if it's perceived to be done in a cynical or disrespectful way. That's certainly a fair point. This instance doesn't cross the line for me personally, but I can see where it would for some, especially for those who are convinced that Obama affirmatively wants to kill as many babies as possible. I don't see that myself and don't take it to be a particularly charitable view.

"dearth of charity"?
F'rinstance?

Margarita,
No one of credible influence is calling B.O. a Muslim. This is just the continuation of The Democats Anioted One's gospel.
Don't Believe me?
http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/

The Faith, Hope, Change thing is simply juxtaposing this "faith" message with his campaign themes of "hope" and "change," while making a play on the well-known set phrase. No sinister interpretation required.

FWIW, my point doesn't turn on any "sinister interpretation." It simply observes that not all "well-known set phrases" can with all due respect and good taste be coopted for political sloganeering, or for that matter for other forms of marketing. To recap what I wrote above:

I wince when I encounter, say, ad copy co-opting specific biblical sentiments to hawk products, e.g., "The meek may inherit the earth, but..."; "It's more blessed to give than to receive, especially when...", etc. I know, I know, most people have no more idea where they come from than "the whole nine yards" or "knowing the ropes." But still, sacred scripture is, well, sacred, and the closer you get to genuinely religious resonances, the dicier it becomes. Suppose that the poster had actually said "Faith. Hope. Change. The Greatest Is Change." Or, say, "Obama: The More Excellent Way."

I don't mind candidates talking about their faith, particularly if they happen to have any. I'm not going to look askance at general references to hope, or even "faith and hope." But when you make a faith-oriented flyer, with a big cross in lights and prominently displayed God-talk, and your display copy consists of what looks like a deliberate riff on 1 Corinthians 13 that includes faith, hope, and something else in the place of "the greatest of these," I find that insensitive and rather sacrilegious.
"Faith. Hope. [Your buzzword here]." That's not showing God's word the respect that is its due.

Ironically appropriate title. There's a dearth of charity to be found on this one apparently.
The context here is that Obama has been the subject of whispering campaign alleging that he is a Muslim. I take this piece to be saying primarily -- and quite helpfully for those who care about such things -- that he is a Christian.
The Faith, Hope, Change thing is simply juxtaposing this "faith" message with his campaign themes of "hope" and "change," while making a play on the well-known set phrase. No sinister interpretation required. Occam's razor, etc.

"The end-times fundamentalist wackos will look at this as the Man of Sin, the Desolation of Abomination"
Should that be The Desolation of Obama-nation?

The end-times fundamentalist wackos will look at this as the Man of Sin, the Desolation of Abomination, the Lawless One, and they'll be gittin' ready for the rapture.
If you get raptured, can I have your stuff?
^ I would like a bumper sticker that says that.

Nathan,
Your comments converge with the truth, but a complete statement of the truth is a little more complicated.

I really don't think a Roman Catholic is allowed to vote for a pro - abortion candidate for president. Obama is pro - abortion. Therefor, Roman Catholics can't vote for him.

Obama says nothing as beautifully as I have ever heard nothing said.

I don't know, something feels wrong. Faith and Hope meant absolutely nothing without that third thing. I think I prefer Charity over Change. Ah, now I know why those websites seemed so strange.

Hmmm....sounds like he professes "Good Works" and not just faith alone.
Boy, plagiarizing the Catholic Church! Will he do nothing to get elected?

ky.barackobama.com
I'm biting my tongue, trying not to make jokes about the first 2 letters of that URL.
BTW, for many people, charity IS change - the spare change in their pockets (as opposed to a well-thought out amount that they are tithing).

Ever self reference "I" is just a couple of points bigger than all of the rest of the font.

Well, in fairness, from a type design perspective, that's because the whole block of text is styled in "small caps." This means that letters that would ordinarily be lowercase are in uppercase, but smaller than the properly capitalized letters. Besides the "I," cf. the "M" in "My" in the first word of the sentence, the "B" "O" in "Barack Obama" -- and, most notably, the "G" in "God."

Great catch, mary martha!

I just noticed something kind of interesting in the text box about what his faith teaches him.
Ever self reference "I" is just a couple of points bigger than all of the rest of the font. It isn't a question of the font just upsizing the letter i because in the word faith it is just the same size. Instead it is an ever so subtle point that in the end it's all about Obama. Not his faith, or what change he is going to make... it's all about the "I"

That site is not approved by Senator Obama!!!!

That site is not approved by Senator Obama!!!!

I fixed Obama's sign!!
http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4156/blowbamatg...

Not to mention the MSM, who are not exactly known for accurate portrayal of Christian values. And yes, I know lots of grammar and syntax that could be picked apart in that post, written in haste.

Obamamessiah is backed by the deep, deep pockets of Oprah, Planned Parenthood, one of the big unions (need to check), probably Tim Gill who is spending huge amounts of money to promote the homosexual agend and possibly CAIR (again need to check).
Obama wrote as a child that he wanted to be President (discussed on another site in terms of his biological and stepfather abandoning him and family).
Presto, a Teflon-coated empty suit front for the above organizations that oppose Christian values.
The thought of Obamamessiah as POTUS scares me stiff. Lots of prayer needed for this election.

Are you'all fer shure that Mr. Obama authorized the format of this 'web poster'. I seriously doubt that. Where or what is the web address at the bottom...something to do with Kaintucky?

It's not a joke. (And it's not a "web poster," but a paper flyer.)

Are you'all fer shure that Mr. Obama authorized the format of this 'web poster'. I seriously doubt that. Where or what is the web address at the bottom...something to do with Kaintucky? Hmmm. Did Obama win big there? Hmmm. I guess if there is the dimmest possibility that he had a hand in devising the poster that he could well afford a li'l ol' joke, Kaintucky style.

I think that we are slowly starting to resemble pagan Rome. Obama, as far as I'm concerned is the world's whipping boy. I say we destroy the IRS and get rid of it. We don't need the IRS.

Chicken,
The states send delegates to the Electoral College. If no one voted (which is kind of a pointless hypothetical), the states would still send the delegates. Likely the state legislatures would approve the delegates as was the case in the early decades of the country.

Interesting that they used a font called "Trajan" for the poster. Wasn't the emperor Trajan one of the worst Christian persecuters of the Roman Empire?

Dear Patrick
Thank you very much for the video. When I made my comment, I didn't notice the title of the post, and didn't understand its subject. I said that exactly because I realized it was the same font used in various movie posters, including The Exorcism of Emily Rose, but also the photo seemed to be like one from a movie poster. Perhaps I thought about the fact that Obama is the favorite for the presidency who has told so many lies thus far and is also an abortion defender, that I immediately thought of a horror movie.

Oh....he's doing the Lords work...not his own for the Lord. That indeed is a "Change". Not sure really the Lord needs Mr. Obama's advocacy from that angle.
-D

To the poster who mentioned that it looks like a movie ad...
That is because the Obama poster uses the "movie font," Trajan. Any time you see that font you automatically think "movie."
You can watch a quick funny video on how Trajan has become synonymous with "movie" just through it's repetitive use in movie advertising.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t87QKdOJNv8

Thanks, Rachel.
If no one voted, how could one assign the votes for the electoral college? In my fantasy world, where no one voted for any of the candidates (to send a message?), what would happen?
The Chicken

To the Chicken,
The Constitution of the United States requires that the President and Vice-President be elected by the Electoral College. The Electoral College votes based on however they choose to divide the votes in the state. Currently each state is giving whichever candidate won in the state all the votes for that state (does that make sense?) So it is possible for a candidate to win the popular vote, but not the election. Because the Electoral College has 538 members, a majority would equal 270. However, it is possible to have a 269-269 tie. In the case of a "tie" the vote is passed on to the House of Representatives. The House then votes the break the tie, and whoever wins there gets the election. If there is also a tie in the House then they just keep voting till someone wins.

That should be;
Does it get tossed over to the senate on the grounds that there were a "tie"?
The Chicken

I have a truly dumb question :)
If no one showed up to vote for president on election day, who would win? Does it get tossed over to the senate on the grounds that there was a "tie"?
The Chicken

While I wish that the next Supreme Court nominee would be Janice Rogers Brown, I'm not sure that'd be at all more likely with a President McCain than a President Obama. A few months ago - before being chastened - McCain annouced his (true) intent not to nominate any mouth-breathers of the far right (my verbal formulation here). Seems to me he's strongly hinted that we'd get more David Souters or Anthony Kennedys and NOT Scalias or Thomases. We know McCain thinks the conservative justices were wrong in overturning big swaths of his McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" (free-speech-squashing) legislation.
So if we can't count on McCain to nominate justices who think Roe was wrongly decided (and who are willing to overturn it, stare decisis notwithstanding), what other compelling virtues does McCain have, aside from his willingness to leave US troops in Iraq for 100 years and his predisposition to "bomb, bomb, bomb - bomb, bomb Iran"?

One of the greatest problems with the poster is not so much for those of us who recognize the twist on scripture, but for those who won't. There are large numbers of "nominals" both Catholic and Protestant who are semi-literate in their faith, who often will recognize scriptural snippets but would not be able to source them or recognize whether they are out of context.
How often do we hear that one, "judge not" or "judge not lest ye be judged" (the King James English lends it some credibility as well).
I fear that there are many who won't even see what has been done here with St. Paul's three virtues.

I still love to sit at the feet of the old and learn
At my age, I find most everyone to be young. Good that I love to to sit at the feet of the young.
What they do not have is enough gratitude from a younger generation.
At my age, I can't thank the "younger generation" enough for all it does for me.
If I ever see a candidate sitting there with me, that will be the one I will probably vote for.
If I see a candidate sitting at my feet, chances are he's not there to learn but looking for money, votes and a photo op.

The Chicken, thank you for your response. I am certainly grateful for what my parents generation has to offer and especially for my parents in particular. As I get older I realize how much I am in debt to them for the sure foundation they've given me to build my life on.
I made reply that I did from the perspective of faith. The one area where my parents did not pass on valuable lessons was faith. It wasn't their fault, they weren't capable of passing it on to me even if they wanted to - their inheritance had been robbed when they were too young to even know what had happened. For the most part my generation has been taught nothing of faith and morals, truth and beauty. I think a lot of people have a subconscious realization of this, an emptiness in their lives - but most of us don't know where to turn to fix it. This vacuum is what has allowed Obama to sweep in like the Music Man.

Dear Brian,
You wrote:
Being under 30, I guess I qualify as young for voting purposes at least. I can't really say my generation has thrown aside the wisdom of our parents - we really haven't inherited much from them.
I don't know that this is really true. Have you every really observed older people? I did not mention parents, per se in my original post - few children ever learn from their parents until they become one and then suffer the same from their own children. Wise people (not necessarily old, but more often) are worth learning from. Unfortunately, I am seeing in my own experience that the patience needed to learn from the prior generation is somehow less present in today's youth.
In my day [ah, here comes the "speech"], I was privileged to study with some really famous people and some really good teachers. We sat at their feet, so to speak. In a recent reunion for one of them, the sense of thanksgiving was almost touchable. Old people do not generate as many new ideas, but they preserve the best of the old ones. Not every new idea is good and not every old idea should be ignored.
It may seem that the baby-boom generation is short on wisdom, but remember that even though this is the generation of Woodstock, it is also the generation that fought in Vietnam. Do you really want to argue that they have no experience. Perhaps they have too much experience. What they do not have is enough gratitude from a younger generation.
You claim not to inherited much from your parent's generation. I suspect you might not have been there when they read the will. I had a chance to briefly talk to that aged mentor when I got to the head of the receiving line for him and I said, "It's really hard trying to teach today's youth - they are so different." He replied, "They are different, but you have to try." So, I try.
I do not claim to be old (I will not give many hints at my age - I am, after all, the Masked Chicken), but I still love to sit at the feet of the old and learn. If I ever see a candidate sitting there with me, that will be the one I will probably vote for.
The Chicken

Truthful?
Doing the "Lords Work" means protecting Americans from the Unborn Menace?