Is Hillary Or Barack More Faithful To Their Religious Principles?

Posted April 14, 2008 | 01:47 AM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

As the controversy over Barack's "bitter" comments continues (at least in the minds of the pundits who get answers to whether it's an issue or not by asking themselves), I watched tonight's Compassion Forum on CNN to see how Barack would handle the subject before a faith-oriented audience. Given the essence of the charge being made against him - that he is an elitist who is out of touch with those American's for whom religion is an important part of their lives - I figured this would be a key opportunity for Barack to show whether or not he is in touch with religious people.

I will write about how well I believe Barack met this challenge in a moment. But first I have to say that what surprised me was that - based on specific comments Hillary made about her own religious beliefs - I found myself unexpectedly measuring how in touch she is with religious people as well. That's why I'm calling this essay "Is Hillary Or Barack More Faithful To Their Religious Principles?"

But getting back to Barack, if the measure of whether a person is in touch with religious people is how religious is that person him (or her) self, then I believe Barack met or surpassed any standard that an objective person could use. And here's why:

Barack didn't just talk the talk. He walked the walk.

First, he explained his use of the word "cling" in his remarks at the San Francisco fundraiser by referring to how he has, himself, clung to his faith during difficult times... (and he's certainly lived through difficult times, including searching for a personal identity in the absence of a father.)... meaning that he doesn't see "clinging" as a bad thing. He wasn't using that terminology in San Francisco in a condescending way.

Second, he was very eloquent in discussing the role of religion in life. On the relationship between science and religion, he said he believes God created the Earth in six days, but that those days may not have been 24 hour long days as we have come to define them. He also said "From the Genesis story (comes) the importance of us being good stewards of the land." "My faith teaches me to take an intergenerational view... we are borrowing this land from our children," he said. He went on to talk about how religion can help with our efforts to stop global warming. "Because it's going to be hard to do, we have to find resources within ourselves to make the necessary sacrifices. Believing the planet is here for more generations to come, religion can bolster our ability to make those sacrifices... and I hope to rally the world to meeting the challenge of global warming." He also talked about religion in the court of public opinion (it belongs there, but in a humble way that doesn't assume that people with other opinions shouldn't be there too), regarding abortion and end of life decisions (he also came from an inclusive point of view), regarding human rights as relates to the use of torture (he was absolutely against it, including "subcontracting torture to other countries"), and regarding poverty (he accepted the challenge to commit to reducing poverty in America by 50 percent in 10 years and gave a whole, integrated systemic answer to what that would require).

Third, he walked the walk in the one way he could in this forum (but also in a way consistent with how he has conducted himself during the campaign). He "turned the other cheek" and refrained from attacking Hillary when responding to her charge that he is an out of touch elitist based on his "bitter" remarks in San Francisco. He explained what he had been talking about in that setting, but then referred to the take on his comments offered up by Hillary (and John McCain's campaign as well) as part of the old-style politics he wants to change. And, as proven after the forum when CNN played the tape of the defense he offered at an event earlier in the day, he used humor to address the attacks on him... not anger - even though at the beginning of the forum the moderator Campbell Brown mistakenly claimed that his "Shame on her" statements at that earlier event were said in anger. The tape showed that they were said in a sarcastic not angry tone of voice, which Campbell Brown acknowledged after watching it herself. You can watch this 8 minute tape here. Am I saying Barack never gets angry? No, of course I'm not. But as you will see in this video (imperfect person as he readily admits he is) he works very hard to practice the principle "Love thy neighbor" even in a situation where you might say he has the "right" to be angry (because he's being slammed with his own words taken out of context).

As delighted as I was to watch Barack on the subject of religion and his political life, I was equally delighted to watch Hillary on the subject as well. And given that each candidate spoke for about 45 minutes (separately, with Hillary going first and then leaving when it was Barack's turn), it was a really rich conversation.

Now, Hillary said many fine things too. I really appreciated how open she was in talking about difficult subjects, some of which (like abortion and end of life decisions, and global warming) were identical to those Barack talked about while others (human rights in China) were not. I have no doubt she would bring a spiritual perspective to the policies she would seek to implement. And I have not doubt that she practices her faith in her personal life and that it helped her become the person she is today just as religion helped Barack become who he is today.

But on the subject of faith and "politics as process"... in other words, faith and how she personally interacts with people and makes decisions when formulating policy... I experienced a huge disconnect as I listened to her speak.

About 11 minutes into the program - and after, in answer to being asked about Barack's controversial comments, she had reiterated her position that he was elite and out of touch and that this was a perception that the Democratic Party had worked hard to overcome in the minds of working class voters - Hillary said "Politics is not a game, because (with it) we have a chance to let other people live up to their God given potential."

Helping people fulfill their potential in the world of politics. As I heard her say this, all I could think was "How can you talk about politics in that context when, in practice, you see it as a never ending battle against all those bad political people out there?" and "Why - if you want all people to reach their potential - are you running a campaign in which you are trying to tear Barack Obama down by twisting what he says around and using other half-truths and deceptive tactics?" (I know some may say I'm wishing for a utopia, but that kind of campaign is possible. Just look at how Mike Huckabee campaigned against John McCain towards the end.)

Three or four minutes later, Hillary got into the spiritual aspects (the best way I can think to call it, given the nature of the show) of her decision making process. With as much sincerity as I would expect from anyone speaking what they believe, she said "You have to be willing to expose yourself to many points of view before you make a decision."... "You can't just surround yourself with people with whom you agree."..."I hope I will never be dismissive of people who don't agree with me."

Listening to her say these things, two thoughts came to mind. Either she believes this is who she really is while being completely unaware that she really is the opposite... or she is saying what she thinks her audience wants to hear, while knowing it isn't true.

Why did I have these thoughts? Because I know that she prefers her "town hall meetings" to be very controlled situations with friendly (and sometimes even "planted") questions... I know her national health care task force rejected serious discussion of a single-payer system... and that a Democratic Congressman whose name is escaping me at the moment and who wanted to help the health care task for was told to get lost (except Hillary actually used profanity).

There are other examples I'm sure we can all think of that demonstrate that Hillary actually suffers from "smartest person in the room" syndrome... partial evidence of which is her inability to admit that she ever makes a mistake.

So, what started as an evening where I expected most of my attention to be on whether or not Barack would be able to respond adequately to the things he said in San Francisco turned into an evening in which I marveled at how Hillary (who is obviously a religious person) is not walking the walk of her religious principles when she interacts with people in the context of political policy making and when she's on the campaign trail.

And in an election season where the people want a break from the political system of the past - a break that will require the mobilizing of people from all sides of the political spectrum by a president who balances being both humble and wise - we, the voters, have been given a unique opportunity to see that Barack Obama brings a more complete, emotionally mature, and balanced set of skills - in this case based on his religious beliefs - to the table. He admits when he makes a mistake, knows and talks about how he isn't perfect (and is supported in remembering that by his wife), and practices the art of listening to people with different points of view so they will all work towards achieving progress together (skills I believe he developed as a community organizer). And he works very hard to campaign on a positive, constructive note.

When it comes to walking the walk of using faith-based human relationship principles when designing and implementing political policy - as well as when campaigning for public office - Barack Obama is more faithful to his religious principles than Hillary Clinton.

 

Comments
30
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:

I am so often amazed at how several people can watch and hear the same thing and whose perception of what they heard are so completely at odds with each others. It seems to me the art of objective analysis and critical thinking skills have fallen by the wayside, a lost or forgotten art relegated to academia. Reading Huffington Post over these last months gives such a startling example of how people only hear that which they wish to hear based on their biases, their loves and even more unfortunately their hates.

Rather than listening to what is said or done people spin with what they believe they know about the situation or person. What it is they "know" is all too often based on what others have said or written that they "know" with their own biases present and so on back to a "source." I don't know when the media became such rumormongering whores. I do know this trend is even more prevalent in the cyberworld where there is no accountability, people can say what they wish and it can go viral and become "fact" very quickly. It is like a game of telephone.

once again the 250 word limit thwarts me.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:12 AM on 04/14/2008

Not to be twarted I return to finish my thoughts useless though they may be.

Except it isn't a game.
People are ruined by what others believe.
People look at others and use words like evil, corrupt, hypocritical. They point to things said out of context and believe they know what it means. Worse, they often hear things said in context and what is clearly "this" of "that" to me but is "that" or "this" to them. Completely opposed to each other.
This is a very sad election to me, one that I believed would be such a great moment in our history as a country and as a party.
I do not blame either candidate for this. I blame the media, the bloggers and the supporters.

It is a very dismal time.

This was a very facile article.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 04/14/2008

I would much rather they keep their religious beliefs to themselves as I beleive in the seperation of Church and State. I do not want to go further down that slippery slope leading to some religious fanatic in the White House.

I am much more about their ability to govern as a representative of all the people free from obligations to lobbyist.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:55 AM on 04/14/2008

I thought this show and the questions asked were disturbing and have no place in our politics. I was very disappointed that democratic candidates participated in this. With the end of George Bush, I had hoped that the role of religion in our lives would return to it's proper place - private - and not mixed with politics. Shows like this are just going to continue that inappropriate mixing.

Both Hillary and Obama should have declined to participate as John McCain declined.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:42 AM on 04/14/2008

They should BOTH have declined for the exact reason I'm sure McBain declined. (See US constitution, Article VI, section 3).

But it's safe to say that Obama could not have declined if Hillary had accepted. She would have used it against him for sure.

Our candidates need to consider those of us in the single largest minority group in the US, the Agnostics/Athiests/Unaffiliateds. (Who knows, we may be the majority). Watching them talk about faith guiding politics is like watching them discuss how they would consult the tooth fairy before getting a root canal. I appreciate that our leaders have personal faith but that's where it should stay, personal.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:34 AM on 04/14/2008

Well said.. And dead on balls accurate...

Michale.....

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:08 PM on 04/14/2008

I am very pleased that it occurred. I, also, had some reservations. But those evaporated when I watched the forum. Religious DOES have a place in our politics, whether we personally want it to or not. I would rather we saw and heard the candidates. I would also appreciate hearing a candidate from another religious tradition or none at all.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:00 AM on 04/14/2008

This focus on faith and religion is very disconcerting. The only faith that the voters should be concerned about is who has the most faith in this country and its people.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:36 AM on 04/14/2008

I think you were very generous in your approving remarks about Hillary. When I watched her all I could see was a manipulative woman saying what she thought the audience wanted to hear. Really, how could anyone believe anything she says after her Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde performances these last few months?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:20 AM on 04/14/2008

Article VI, Section 3 of the U.S Constitution says, "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States".

This "thing" last night may not have been a direct qualifier but I am certain many people were using this as a way to evaluate who they would vote for, evidenced by how CNN had a couple of religious leaders come on afterward to give their opinion. The guy who is the leader of the souther baptist convention (his name escapes me) even said he thought he could have helped Obama with some of his answers.

This was sponsored by DividedWeFail.org, with whom I would tend to agree in general, but now I see in a very different light.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:54 AM on 04/14/2008

This article is more about honesty and personal integrity than religion.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:56 AM on 04/14/2008

If I may give some insight as an outsider who has no Dem dog in the hunt. I have never voted for a Dem president in my life, but I am leaning Obama to date.

I have often compared Obama to Tom Clancy's fictional charater, "Jack Ryan". I see many appealing similiarities between Obama & Ryan. They both seem to feel that a government should serve the people, not itself. They both feel that the "professional politician" is a DETRIMENT to good government, not an asset.. And they both seem to speak to how they really feel, even if it might not be politically correct to do so. As an aside I hope that, as his first act as President, Obama will retire the term and the idea of political correctness from the American psyche forever!

Granted there are probably as many differences between Obama and Ryan. Their views on abortion are certainly different. In that, my views are closer to Obama's than Ryan's.

The biggest difference is the National Security credentials. This is my biggest stumbling block to supporting Obama completely.. I am waiting to see who he picks to augment his security and defense deficiencies... That will be the determining factor for me.

In short, I get the feeling that the way I feel about Obama is the way my parents felt about JFK. It really gives me a good feeling to actually vote FOR someone, rather than voting AGAINST someone else.

Michale.....

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:09 AM on 04/14/2008

And another thing, how was it decided who was allowed in the 'faith based" audience and what was the make up of the audience? Was there some kind of test they had to pass to show how "faithful" they really are? Was there a "turning water into wine" competition? How about healing some of the vets coming back from Iraq? I'd think that would be a shoe-in! Plus might even give them some real brownie points with their deity of choice and fix some of the atrocities of the "faithful" thing that is now taking up space in the oval office.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:01 AM on 04/14/2008

Great essay. I felt the same way watching Obama. He addressed the matter forthrightly as he addressed the questions of his Pastor. Obama is such a wholesome guy, I find myself wishing I could behave like him on one of his worst days. I can't aspire to get even close to his best days. We have a chance to elect a leader who this country really deserves.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:08 AM on 04/14/2008

well... from my understanding Hillary is part of the religious order known as 'The Family' or 'The Foundation' along with several republican senators. They meet in private,in cells, and seem to have some concepts of elitism built into their christian understandings... I am very disturbed that this issue has not been covered more fully. Supposedly this organization is very powerful politically and may explain some of Hillary's associations with some of the right wing republican figures mentioned of late.. It seems that the last report I saw on the subject was pulled in short order and msnbc did a short bit on it and the video was pulled from all sites... I find it very disturbing. There is supposed to be a book out on the subject in May from a man who partcipated in it for a while. I hope that it will actually get released...

I don't expect Senator Obama to be perfect as a speaker etc... I do expect him to do his best to live up to his own ideals of honesty, integrity, and service. I wish I could say as much for other candidates but I cannot. I don't understand why anyone is supporting the Clintons going back to the white house. I don't trust them and certainly could not in good conscience vote to support that.

I am truly grateful that Senator Obama is such a brilliant and good man and that he is willing to fight for the leadership of our country.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:59 AM on 04/14/2008




What does religion have to do with being president of these United States btw?

Isn't there a separation of church and state dictum somewhere in the Constitution. What we saw tonight was seeing how two candidates can woo the religious vote, but is any of what they said really relevant to the problems this country faces.

If one of the candidates had been an atheist, or agnostic, would they have held his compassion forum or whatever the fuck they call it? Because our forefathers didn't stipulate we had to have Christian presidents. Does that mean an atheist will never be president. A shame, some of them are pretty smart.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:47 AM on 04/14/2008

Yes, there definitely separation of church and state as discussed in the Constitution; I can't remember the Amendment, but I do know it states, "there shall be NO test of religion" for any person seeking a public office", or something very close to that. My husband looked it up when the Pastor Wright sermon sound bites were being looped 24/7 for more than 2 weeks. We just wanted to know what the Constitution said about religion.

BTW, I positively could NOT watch the compassion forum, because when I saw HRC, I know for a fact that she is not compassionate and since I did not see Barack on stage during the time HRC was there, I turned it off. I can't stand to see or hear her knowing she is such a FAKE human being with absolutely no compassion in her person, so I just could not waste me time having her try to convince me or anyone else that she is "genuine". She absolutely does NOT walk the walk!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:29 AM on 04/14/2008

Dear Mr. Brant, thank you for your intelligent and thoughtful article. What strikes me is Obama's emotional intelligence, his vast understanding of the issues, his willingness to make mistakes, his wilingness to take the high road. His willingness to stay positive takes tremendous discipline and emotional maturity. Clinton has attacked him mercilessly and that has been her downfall and why she has lost many supporters.

The fact that he is so comfortable in his skin speaks volumes. His poise and grace under fire are the qualities we need in a leader especially on the world stage. His ability to inspire and galvanize the American people to engage in the process is is absolutely amazing. He strives to empower us---we sense that and we respond and it's an affirmation of YES! Yes I can, Yes we can are not empty slogans, they're affirmations. He makes it clear that solving problems will not easy, it will not be a cake walk and we respond because we know in our hearts that anyone who tells us otherwise is lying.

'Obama presents a view of governing that is inclusive and relies on Americans to work with their government to solve sobering problems at home and abroad. By contrast Clinton promotes a self-centered governing style that drives home what she would do as president. She asks little of Americans and discourages opposing views.'

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 AM on 04/14/2008

Her campaign reaks in negativity. Pushes people away.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 AM on 04/14/2008

This article is THE TRUTH..although, to me, most of Hillary's comments seemed.....ingenuine...she rambled alot because she didnt know how to answer teh questions..some of the questions still went unanswered,...mostly questions that revolved around her faith and grace. I think she said what she thought may have sounded good but it sounded like she was taking words from a religious song and trying to put them in her own words. Just wasnt very convincing..alot like when she has given her most recent speeches...I think toward the end she got more comfortable...but, like you said, i dont think there was a connection so in turn..her audience didnt connect..

Obama on the other hand..was comfortable..no circles...had extensive knowledge on all questions that were asked of him. These werent rehearsed yet he had a quick and excellent answer to all the questions...and if you noticed..the questions that were asked to him, were alot more presidential then the questions asked to Hillary...hmm

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:04 AM on 04/14/2008

I liked how she spoke directly about abortion and end of live choices. Obama went around on those a little bit more.

But on her faith in politics Hillary was talking in circles. I cringe all the way through the first 15-20 minutes.

Only blunder by Obama I saw was his comment on evolution, since he wasn't asked explicitly on this view. Leaves ammunition for the Religious Right.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:37 AM on 04/14/2008

Amen. And thank you.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:27 AM on 04/14/2008




Yeah, but uhm Hillary invented religion.

Yeah, all religions. Not only Christianity but Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam...Shintoism...Animism...Judaism...

And not only that she created the world in six...no FIVE days. And even had time to save a burning orphanage on the last two days.

She also saved all the animals in the world from extinction. And her ark was bigger and more cost effective than Noah's. And she parted not only the red Sea but also The Pacific and Atlantic as well.

Can Barack say that?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:05 AM on 04/14/2008

I will not be bamboozled by Mr. Obama Nor I will allow myself to be played by Mr. Obama. I consciously downright refuse the Obamamikans hyper-contextualizing every single of his dismal faux-pas. There are no larger peers of relativism to dock here. His broader cruise ship appeal has sunk"starting from the Wright issue. He made a huge gross generalization of the rural majority in a sophomoric plight in front of a whole bunch San Franciscans multi-millionaires. But if I am getting too elitist here allow me to slap myself back to reality: God Damn America is wrong. Insensitive 9/11 remarks are wrong. Disconnected remarks contemptuous of your own voters is wrong and no amount of "context-caging can change that.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:01 AM on 04/14/2008

AlejandroK, Apparently you did not listen, nor did you want to listen, to Obama's remarks, because if you had listened, you would have heard him say that he understands how voters in PA (and for that matter, in a lot of other towns and cities in America) can be bitter and vote on religious issues, gun issues, or abortion issues because they feel that they have heard all other politicians for decades tell them that they were going to get help for the economies, and for years nothing has changed and yes, people do become bitter when things are promised and never change for the better. So since you are so terribly obtuse, then please just vote for whomever you want and believe whatever you want because no amount of talking to someone who is obtuse can ever amount to more that wasting ones breath. Apparently you have no clue about Obama and keep your uneducated view and your "bamboozled" view to yourself. until you get educated!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:53 AM on 04/14/2008

`I think this is an example of hypercontextualizing.

and bitter.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 04/14/2008

When you have soo many people that appreciate Obama
So many officials (people educated in politics) that believe in Obama..and not cause he paid them
People over seas wearing Obama gear
Kids, Teens, Young Adults, Old Adults, Republicans, Dems, Independents, ect..all support this man
millions of people...how could you minimize this to being "bamboozled"..the WORLD is not that naive

It seems like whenever these petty twists of obama's words come up...it takes us away from the real problems like the clintons supporting Nafta and still enforcing intl. trade, the fact that hillary has been caught lying on numerous times..the fact that the clintons lash out on superdelegates that choose not to endorse them..and the fact that 3 days after the PA primaries..Hillary will be in court on some dirt she did when her husband was in office...w

WAKE UP!!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:09 AM on 04/14/2008

You are totally out of line AlexajandroK. If you take the time to read today's stories on Huff Post you will see that the Clintons practiced contempt of the working class over the last l6 years, i.e. 'I could have stayed home and baked cookies'; but there are many contemptuous comments that Bill made. Nothing wrong with saying God Damn America as there is nothing wrong with saying God Bless America....it's the ying-yang theory. To love one's country blindly is as foolish to love a person blindly....it's a fools game. I don't agree with all of Rev. Wright's remarks, but why should I, or why shouldn't I? They are his beliefs, not Obamas. Most people stay within their church inspite of their pastor....they stay because of the church community, not the pastor. There's no context-caging here. One could accuse all the candidates of being elitists, as one could accuse the mainstream media of being elitists as well. The average guy or gal is not going to run for president or become a ceo and so on. You're just looking for an excuse not to like Obama, for reasons I don't know. Most of the folks at thw SF event were not multi-millionaires.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:05 AM on 04/14/2008

If Clinton was not running would you still dislike Obama that much (say he was running against Kerry in 2004)?

Or are you talking this way because you want your candidate to win?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:42 AM on 04/14/2008

right back atcha...

not personally of course.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 AM on 04/14/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 

Popular Stories on HuffPost
M.S. Bellows, Jr. Clinton's Open Letter To Obama On MI and FL

On a day when it appears that the Michigan controversy may be resolved in a way...

Obama Vice President Picks: Who Are The Frontrunners?

With the Democratic nomination now in its endgame, it's time to speculate on...