suec03

What about the info I read that he can't use donations to his campaign to directly pay off hers? He can only fundraise separately for donations to be paid directly to her campaign by those interested in doing so. posted 07/14/2008 at 15:09:09

Well at least Camera Ashe's mother is a photographer! That makes some sense of it. posted 07/08/2008 at 18:50:55

Wow! That kind of tough grilling on a morning show? I hope other cable news and network news personalities follow John Roberts' lead and ask focussed, legitimate, well-prepared substantive questions of the candidates. posted 07/08/2008 at 15:50:04

Sen. Obama said ATTACKS on candidate's family members should not be part of the campaign. posted 07/08/2008 at 15:36:01

And Hagel is not pro-Choice. posted 07/07/2008 at 21:03:36

I would like to see Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island get more exposure. He is a West Point graduate and former Army Ranger with the rank of Captain. He got a master's degree in public policy from the JFK School of Gov't. at Harvard, and is a Harvard Law School graduate. He is Roman Catholic. He has handled himself well the few times I have seen him on TV. Not flashy, but calm, direct, and well-informed. posted 07/07/2008 at 21:01:23

Congressman Frank is a wonderful member of the House of Representatives, chairing the financial services committee. Are there any openly gay members of the Senate these days? Congressman Frank and Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, both in the House, have been the most visible. posted 07/07/2008 at 20:51:49

What so many in the mainstream media are missing in Gen. Clark's comments was that Gen. Clark said that to staff an important position, you identify the set of skills the candidate needs to succeed in the position. He said that neither getting shot down in battle nor leading a squadron later in peacetime lines up with any of the executive decision making skills needed in the "skill set" of a President of the USA. He said that John McCain's military experiences do not demonstrate a grasp of current geopolitical issues nor diplomacy skills, nor executive decision making in a time of crisis. posted 07/02/2008 at 17:39:44

How could they have been roommates when Gates attended Harvard College and Jobs attended Reed College in Oregon? posted 06/27/2008 at 17:01:18

Because "religious people" includes people who are pro-choice, pro-environment, pro-labor, feminist, antiracist, and so on. The mainstream media have given a grossly distorted view of what it means to be religious in the USA, because it was the religious right that mightily campaigned to be heard.

If you only listened to nonreligious people, you might only be listening to 20% of the electorate. The parade would pass you by. Coalition work is still the way to go to build a progressive majority to elect better members to the House and Senate as well as a better President. posted 06/26/2008 at 15:17:39

Thank you to those who are working to shift sex education for minors away from abstinence only to abstinence plus discussion of the emotional, health, and financial issues of healthy sexuality and parenting and working to increase broad distribution of truthful information on contraceptives plus increasing access to contraception. I think that to the extent it can be done in an election year, your unsung work should be honored. Along with this of course we need child, woman, family and single-dad and nonparent guardian-friendly policies to increase availability and affordability of quality child care for working parents working all work schedules, and increases in minimum wage and universal health care so that parents can be both highly-productive workers and highly-effective parents.

It is just a fact that mainstream media will look for one religious leader to set off against another. Now that they finally realize there are moderate and liberal religious persons, they have put Jim Wallis in their contact lists as the go-to-guy of religious political liberals, so he is being given the forum to express whatever ideas he personally supports. It would be good to get additional pro-choice religious voices out into the media so news producers will have additional names in their contact lists. posted 06/26/2008 at 15:11:06

Don't forget that the Nazis were not socialist. Socialism was in fashion at the time and it was a marketing ploy to claim they were national socialists. They were the opposite of socialists--they were fascists (a government organized for the needs of big business, not the needs of the people). posted 06/25/2008 at 00:26:45

Remember? He drove the moneychangers out of the temple! I don't think he did it by asking nicely. posted 06/25/2008 at 00:01:46

No, he didn't, but some reporters seem to overlook that because they feel he has a large radio audience they must respect. posted 06/24/2008 at 21:40:05

Apparently the budget-cutting mainstream media does, because reporting on what these self-anointed religious leaders say costs them nothing. When is the last time they reported critically on Dr. Dobson? posted 06/24/2008 at 21:37:29

I get the joke! You mean his statements are all sound: a lot of noise with no meaning! posted 06/24/2008 at 21:34:21

Dobson is a child psychologist, not a preacher. It is the confused mainstream media that seems to keep alive the myth that Dr. Dobson is a minister. posted 06/24/2008 at 21:33:13

Be sure you let us all know when you see Sen. Obama agree with Dr. Dobson on an issue that takes rights away from us. That will be the day that Hell freezes over. posted 06/24/2008 at 21:31:10

And imagine this! Dr. Dobson has said he cannot endorse John McCain due to disagreements he has with him, so all Dobson can do is tear down Sen. Obama! posted 06/24/2008 at 21:30:23

He is not ordained. He is not a minister. He is no more or no less a man (or woman) of God than any of the rest of us. posted 06/24/2008 at 21:26:20

Although James Dobson "preaches" his view of Christianity, he is not an ordained minister. He is a layperson like any of the rest of us. His doctorate is in child development, not theology. posted 06/24/2008 at 21:23:32

Take this seriously. If she is married, I hope her spouse is so proud of her accomplishment that he takes her uniforms to the cleaners for her. posted 06/24/2008 at 21:51:17

He's building a broad-based coaltion, including religious believers and nonbelievers. Why are you so cynical? posted 06/24/2008 at 16:13:35

Pagans are believers in earth-centered spirituality including gods and goddesses. Christian bigots lumped atheists in with pagans and extended the "pagan" term beyond its original meaning. "DieHard' clearly identified as an atheist, not a pagan. Please respect the dignity of both groups to their beliefs or nonbelief. posted 06/24/2008 at 16:10:04

Barack Obama is not a preacher, and considers his faith personal. He does not condemn other faiths. He is a scholar of the US Constitution who lectured on it at the University of Chicago Law School, and will be guided by it and by separation of church and state in his presidency. He is standing up and taking on the Christian bigots by refusing to allow them a vacuum into which to move to recruit Christian voters to support John McCain. He is pointing out that for Christians who wish to follow Jesus, and serve the least of our brethren (the homeless, poor, disabled and unemployed), his Democratic candidacy will uphold that aspect of their Christian values, and though he will be a secular president, he will not disrespect their Christian values. posted 06/24/2008 at 16:05:36

Ph.D. in child development from USC in 1967 according to his Wikipedia article, which cites to information in his psychologist license. By the way, the conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer is a psychiatrist (M.D.) so go figure. posted 06/24/2008 at 15:56:59

The author of the "James Dobson" article in wikipedia cites James Dobson's psychologist license to say he received his Ph.D in child development from the University of Southern California (USC) in 1967. As I recall, the Methodists originally founded USC, but control later passed away from the Methodist Church. posted 06/24/2008 at 15:54:14

I mean "keeps" in that he discards much of the rest of the hundreds of commandments to the Jews and selects out the ten commandments to retain and not discard. posted 06/24/2008 at 15:48:12

Remember that "Corinthians" is Paul's letter to the Christian followers building the Christian community in Corinth, and contains Paul's ideas. Timothy is entitled as a letter from Paul to Timothy. It is Paul's teaching about how the Christians should believe. It is left to the reader to decide to what extent Paul was divinely inspired and whether such divine inspiration could overcome Paul's own prejudices as a Jewish man of that era. posted 06/24/2008 at 15:46:06

Don't forget that "Romans" in the Bible is a shorthand for the full title of the book, "Paul's epistle (letter) to the Romans." It is Paul's word and his ideas. posted 06/24/2008 at 15:41:45

Religion is not meant to be fact or science. It is an effort to explain things unknown, such as what happens to us after we die. Religion can be used for good ends or for bad ends. Religion itself is neutral. It is what individuals and groups do with their particular conclusions on religious questions and mysteries that creates the problems. posted 06/24/2008 at 15:37:45

He isn't a biblical scholar at all! He received a doctorate in child psychology back in the 50's or early 1960's. He has taken his radio parenting program and so infused it with his personal take on the bible that people think he is a minister. He keeps the ten commandments because it suits his ends to have moral rules to raise children by, but feels that the coming of Jesus created a new covenant which freed Jesus's followers from following the strictures of the Hebrew scriptures we now know as the Old Testament (a Christian perjorative term for the Hebrew bible). posted 06/24/2008 at 15:34:23

And some modern Biblical scholarship says "camel" was a mistranslation of a word that should have been translated as "rope." Trying to thread a rope through the eye of a needle without success makes more sense than trying to put a large animal through the eye of a needle. Just more proof that a Bible is only as good as the translators who rewrote it! posted 06/24/2008 at 14:37:41

Rather than generalizing that these Christians are too stupid, ignorant or lazy to comprehend the Bible, remember that many were brought up as children in these churches, and their parents taught them that this interpretation was the only correct one. A number of children raised in mainline churches grew up unsatisfied and after a period "unchurched" became busy working parents who sought churches to expose their children to Christianity. Conservative megachurches developed with child care, parenting groups, Boy Scout troops, youth groups, even health clubs on church grounds, all with multiple worship services on Saturdays and Sundays to meet every schedule. They were marketing geniuses! Unfortunately, the Bible study groups and preaching they provided did not include critical theological scholarship.

Don't write off all Christians. Some people are leaving these megachurches as they are hit with moral and financial scandals, and some because they start questioning the message. But by then they are dependent on the youth groups and friendships made there.

Some evangelicals are disillusioned with tight alignment with the Republican Party and are pulling away from partisan politics and embracing environmentalism and global issues like HIV/AIDS and malaria. Don't give up on all these overscheduled Christians. Welcome anyone who will work with us to elect the Democrats this year to heal the country from the damage inflicted by the Bush-Cheney administration. posted 06/24/2008 at 14:04:54

They have failed to grasp that the books of the Bible, with their inconsistencies with one another, clearly point to a variety of human writers who did not know each other. Many stories were passed down orally for centuries before they were written down in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) and the writers of the Gospels were not present at the events they recount in their writings. Paul wrote his epistles before the Gospels were written, yet the Gospels appear before the epistles in the Bible because the editors decided that they dealt with chronologically earlier matters of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, while Paul's epistles dealt with the building and spread of the Christian church after Jesus was executed by the Roman authorities. Paul and his followers were upset with their fellow Jews who refused to embrace Jesus. Paul decreed that Christians need not be circumcised. This way they would not give themselves away to the Romans if they were seen naked during exercise or at the baths. It was about spreading the Jesus message, and dietary laws that had seemed so important centuries before seemed less important with improvements in sanitation. It would greatly help discussion if those studying the Bible would do so with a critical eye and keeping firmly grounded in the context of the Roman occupation and empire that the New Testament writers lived in. Pick up a John Dominic Crossan book about Jesus! posted 06/24/2008 at 13:49:00

One problem is that Dr. Dobson is not a minister, and is not using a ministry to get the word out. He has a Ph.D in child development he received decades ago in a much more repressed and less enlightened age. He has used his radio program to reach out to parents who want advice on raising their children, and melded his narrow, conservative so-called "Christian" views to his advice on parenting, where so many people are vulnerable. Unfortunately, lazy TV and newspaper reporters and editors have equated his view of the Bible with Christianity itself, to the exclusion of the views of the majority of American Christians! With the exception of PBS Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, which is ecumenical in coverage, I ignore most anything a nontheologian says about Christianity in the mainstream media. There are excellent books by authors like Karen Armstrong, John Shelby Spong and others that probe the origins and setting and meaning of the Christian story. posted 06/24/2008 at 13:34:49

Remember that Dr. Dobson is not a "preacher", he is a layman. He is not ordained. He got a doctorate in child development many decades ago. posted 06/24/2008 at 13:15:58

Sorry. Your denomination may tell you that your interpretations are correct, but there is much current Bibilical scholarship to support Sen. Obama's views. His views are well supported theologically.

Remember that the Bible is an anthology of books written by humans to share their faith experience, during the historical era and at the geographical location that they knew. They did not have the benefit of later scientific discovery to explain phenomena like solar eclipses or homosexuality. Each religion is part tribal custom and part a struggle with the meaning of human existence and death. The Bible is a book to struggle with, but not always to be taken literally. I don't understand why people claim that the New Testament books are the Word of God or that "God said it", when clearly they were written by Paul of Tarses, and many others known now as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, to share with others their faith experience and draw them into the Christian community. Much of the New Testament was unknown to Paul, as it was written after his death. His epistles are older than the four Gospels. Much was passed by word of mouth before it was ever written down. What about the books that the early Christian councils excluded from the Bible? Did God tell the council members which books to include and which were heresy? This does not change the fact that there is much to learn from the message the Bible writers were trying to express. posted 06/24/2008 at 13:14:05

Remember that James Dobson in NOT a Christian minister. He is only "Dr. James Dobson" because he has a Ph.D in child development. He does not have a theology degree. posted 06/24/2008 at 12:54:53

Sen. Obama and Howard Dean have learned the lesson that you have not. The Democratic Party has tried it your way for years and years and lost to Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. Wake up and smell the coffee! We humanists, atheists and agnostics are outnumbered and have to find allies among good Christians who will support the Democratic Party platform and its candidates. To insult Christians is to write off the majority of African American, Hispanic and white voters. There aren't enough non-Christians to win without them. To address their concerns as Christians is not the same as promoting theocracy. Turn off the TV for awhile and stop listening to these ignorant TV news anchors and correspondents who think religious=Christian millenial dispensationalist. James Dobson, the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, John Hagee, and Ron Parsley represent only a segment of all Christians. If we ignore Christians and what is important to them, then they will hear only Christian extremists addressing their faith concerns. Sen. Obama is striking the right note. He is challenging the extremists for the hearts and minds of moderate and independent Christians whose faith calls them to social justice and helping the poor. posted 06/24/2008 at 12:51:44

Even if the candidates were to stop referring to the Bible, that would not alter the fact that variations of Bible-based Christian faith are the lenses many voters use to make decisions about their lives. The Democratic Party allowed a vacuum to develop by treating Christianity as the elephant in the room they were afraid to touch. This allowed the elephant party, the Republicans, to rush into the vacuum. George W. Bush brought Christian evangelical support to his Episcopalian father's presidential campaigns. To not speak to Christian voters about faith is to throw in the towel and let the Republicans win.

Many of us who are agnostics, atheists and humanists know too well what it is like to be scorned by certain Christians. But telling liberal and moderate Christians that Jesus is just an imaginary friend makes the speaker look foolish. There are good mainline Christians among many Catholics, Episcopalians, UCC, American Baptists (the former Northern Baptists), some Methodists and others who are natural allies for Democrats on social justice issues. Many African Americans of various traditions from AME, CME, Baptist and Pentecostal traditions are open to Democratic candidates who will end war, invest in job creation, job training and social uplift. Why drive them away by disrespecting their faith? Pick up a few John Shelby Spong books such as "Why Christianity Must Change or Die" and learn about non-theistic views of Jesus. There is no God with a white beard in the non-theistic view. posted 06/24/2008 at 12:41:41

To jacqmac: Great comment! Can you point me to info on the various Clinton advisers and their new roles? posted 06/16/2008 at 14:35:36

Would Sen. Clinton choose Patti Solis Doyle as her chief of staff? When Sen. Clinton replaced her as campaign manager, did that simply mean Ms. Solis Doyle's skills were better suited to be a chief of staff than a campaign manager? Or were there any bad feelings? Can someone please point me to some material that would give a clue what the current status is of the relationship between Sen. Clinton and Ms. Solis Doyle? posted 06/16/2008 at 14:31:30

Designating Patti Solis Doyle as chief of staff to the as yet unnamed VP nominee could be a shrewd preemptive move by the Obama campaign. It shows the Obama campaign's willingness to place a former senior advisor to Sen. Clinton, and a woman, in the key position of chief of staff to the VP nominee. It also says the Obama campaign will not allow the VP nominee to choose her/his own chief of staff. If Sen. Clinton were chosen as running mate, she would have to accept Ms. Solis Doyle as her chief of staff, or be the one to fire her. It is still unclear to me the exact reason Ms. Solis Doyle was replaced as Sen. Clinton's campaign manager. Perhaps Maggie Williams just brought additional skills. Someone else has posted here that there were rumors from the Clinton campaign of malfeasance by Ms. Solis Doyle. If the accusations were made but were false, giving Ms. Solis Doyle this important position may be a signal that Ms. Solis Doyle's integrity is vindicated and that Sen. Clinton is not likely to be the VP nominee. posted 06/16/2008 at 14:26:56

To Daly: I speak Spanish, but I do not understand your comment. "Sobre" can mean "about", "upon" or "envelope." Were you looking for a word meaning "super" or "superior"? Also, "muchacha" literally means "girl." I think she is old enough to be a "mujer" (woman), not a "muchacha" (girl or possibly "babe"). If she is a "Woman of the Hour", perhaps she is "La Mujer Sobresaliente (outstanding) de Nuestros Tiempos (our time)." posted 06/16/2008 at 14:05:37

Calling on all absent fathers, of all ethnic groups, to get involved with their children's lives is a good message and good that it comes from a prominent man who grew up without his father, with his grandfather, stepfather and other important men in his life trying to fill up that hole.

Sen. Obama is not calling this the exclusive answer. He knows it is also important to get our country's economy back on track, producing jobs here in the US that are full-time jobs with benefits and wages sufficient to support a family. Sen. Obama will also be calling for investment in education and technical training so fathers and mothers can prepare themselves for the good-paying jobs that will be created.

When more parents can demonstrate by example that parents both work for a living and spend quality time with their children, children will see this as a normal expectation to have for themselves when they are adults, working full-time and staying involved in their children's lives.

We need family-friendly policies like universal health care which does not exempt preexisting medical conditions. We need widely-available affordable quality child care for hours parents are on the job. We need protections for union organizing to improve wages and working conditions to put more money in parent's pockets and cut back on the need to work overtime or second jobs. posted 06/16/2008 at 15:13:13

Please! He was a Christian addressing a room full of Christians at a Sunday Service. He grew up without a church. His grandfather signed up the family to attend a Unitarian Universalist church because it respected all religions. He identifies with the United Church of Christ, the most open-minded of the Christian churches, whose motto is "God is still speaking,".... Barack Obama is ecumenical. He respects people and their religions or no religion at all. He was making a statement of his faith belief, not a statement of scientific belief. He has taught Constitutional law and supports separation of church and state. Allow the man to be a Christian, in a church, addressing other Christians of a denomination different than his, on a Sunday. As a Unitarian Universalist myself, where we welcome humanists, agnostics, atheists, Wiccans, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims and all others to join with us, I don't have a problem with Barack Obama's profession of faith in church on a Sunday. If you study African-American history, you will know that enslaved Africans created their own forms of Christian worship and formed their own churches, emphasizing the story of the Israelites escaping bondage in Egypt. For them, Christianity was not a new form of bondage. There are politically liberal Black Christians and politically conservative Black Christians. Get over it and get back to campaigning for him, MJS! posted 06/15/2008 at 23:19:11

Now if former Sen. Jim Sasser's son is the Chairman of the Tennessee Democratic Party, why hasn't he cleared up this misconception by now with his own state Executive Board members? Isn't that the kind of leadership we expect from a state chair? posted 06/13/2008 at 20:56:40

How did Al Gore get along with these Tennessee Democratic Party leaders? Now that Barack Obama has secured enough pledged delegate and superdelegate support to become the party's nominee at the convention, why doesn't Al Gore now endorse him? If Democrats in Tennessee have any respect for Al Gore, such an endorsement could be very helpful to reassure Tennessee Democrats that Sen. Obama is an American candidate they can support. What would be the downside with independents or wavering Republicans? I don't see any. How many Democrats in Tennessee would still think Sen. Obama was a terrorist after an Al Gore endorsement? posted 06/13/2008 at 20:50:32

It was a 5-4 decision. Justice Kennedy wrote for the majority and was joined by Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer. Those dissenting were Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito. posted 06/13/2008 at 20:28:21

As a subscriber to Sirius, who had to wave goodbye to C-SPAN radio, PRI and Air America as each one left Sirius over the past couple years, I look forward to subscribing to a package that brings them back to my satellite radio, without having to give up my NPR stations, which are currently exclusive to Sirius only. posted 03/24/2008 at 19:51:54