More ugh

You remember the Obama speech video I posted a few days ago, right?

This is absolutely ludicrous.

“Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal rather than religion-specific values,” Obama said. “It requires their proposals be subject to argument and amenable to reason.”
Dobson said the suggestion is an attempt to lead by the “lowest common denominator of morality.”
“Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?” he said. “What he’s trying to say here is unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe.”

No, no that’s absolutely not at all what he’s saying. Read his quote again.
Obama is simply saying that you have to support your positions with non-religious arguments, not that you have to convince everybody that you’re right (and certainly not that you have no right to fight for your beliefs).

Ugh I hate evangelicals.
I reiterate that people who misuse religion (or use it to justify their actions) are destroying this nation (and, to a certain extent, the world).

On the flip side, why is this even an issue?

Bhutto’s killing was an “unfortunate event,” he said, but McCain’s “knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who’s ready to be commander-in-chief. And it helped us.”
Asked if McCain would stand to benefit from a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, Black answered, “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him.”

I read absolutely nothing malicious in that. He was trying to emphasize that, in such an event, he believes McCain would be better suited to handle the situation. Perhaps he could have phrased it better (something like, “He would handle the situation better and, as such, would have an advantage over his opponent Barack Obama.”) but I don’t believe the meaning is lost.

Don’t even get me started about how people overanalyzed Mrs. Obama’s comments on being proud of her country (you know what she meant, seriously) and their “terrorist fist jab.”
What is wrong with politics these days?

One thought on “More ugh

  1. So, the Black comment above about the terrorist attack really reads as “Yeah, as long as the country gets attacked in, like, the next few months, we are so totally solid on this presidency thing.”

    We know he meant “McCain would do a better job in this situation” – he’s one of the top advisors to the guy, and it’s job to think so. The fact that he said it and the way he did is some terrible Freudian slip as to how they view the state of the nation/world and how they plan to exert control over it. Comments like that genuinely frighten me, because scare-tactics like that work SO well to sway popular opinion. It’s not like we haven’t already had 8 years of that…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *