Well, I could dig up speeches by the aforementioned Governor Strickland where he mentions faith and the Church quite a lot. And as I said above, he’s an ordained minister.
And frankly, these kinds of comments are akin to what Huckabee says, if you were to listen. Also interestingly, Strickland has caused no controversy in running.
It leads me to suspect that opposition to people like Huckabee is less because they are Christian but because they are Republican and conservative. That’s certainly fine, though it would be nice if people just said so and left these silly side issues alone.
Sailboat, I’m not a Huckabee supporter by a long shot, but when he said that being a minister is great preparation for serving in public office he might not mean the religious aspect mostly. Being an effective minister in a large church means being a good administrator, being a good fundraiser, being good at selling your initiatives to groups who may have their own interests, being a good listener to your constituents and many other skills. Being a good preacher can’t hurt either, even if you arent’ talking about God.
Somehow I missed that one. And now I feel bad because I didn’t get her anything. (Well, at least she was honest enough to admit that these are presents we “can’t afford” [stupidest comment she could have made about her programs].)
If Strickland were running for president, that would be a relevant comparison. Seeing as how most of us don’t live in Ohio, though, I’m not sure why you’d expect the governor’s race there to generate the same kind of scrutiny as the presidency.
If Huckabee wants to take the nation back for Christ, clearly he wants to govern in a Christian way. It seems reasonable, then, to ask what he thinks Christ wants. Presumably, this is revealed in his sermons.
Why is this so tough to understand? If in his sermons he launched hate-filled diatribes against gays and Jews, he is unfit for office. It is no different than if he made such a speech in a private club. He obviousy doesn’t have a legal obligation to turn over the sermons, but it’s hardly unreasonable for people to ask for them. And I don’t see a left-right double standard here, either. I guaran-godamn-tee you that the right would be demanding word-for-word transcripts of any speech Obama gave in a mosque, and would be poring over his sermons if he had ever served as a preacher. What’s wrong with wanting to know the religious views of a candidate, if he thinks those views are part of what qualifies him for public office (as Huckabee clearly thinks, based on the quotes above?
Evidently she’s giving presents to Bring the Troops Home and Universal Pre-K. Either that or she customarily tells what the gift is on the nametags. Either way, something of a misfire.
Sorry to interrupt your exercise in tu quoue, but Strickland did not make an issue of his religion being of great importance when he ran for governor. Huckabee is a different story.
*"Huckabee is running a very effective ad in Iowa about religion. “Faith doesn’t just influence me,” he says on camera, “it really defines me.” The ad then hails him as a “Christian leader.”
Forget the implications of the idea that being a “Christian leader” is some special qualification for the presidency of a country whose Constitution (Article VI) explicitly rejects any religious test for office. Just imagine that Huckabee were running one-on-one in Iowa against Joe Lieberman. (It’s a thought experiment. Stay with me.) If he had run the same ad in those circumstances, it would have raised an outcry. The subtext — who’s the Christian in this race? — would have been too obvious to ignore, the appeal to bigotry too clear.
Well, Huckabee is running against Romney (the other GOP candidates are non-factors in Iowa) and he knows that many Christian conservatives, particularly those who have an affinity with Huckabee’s highly paraded evangelical Christianity, consider Romney’s faith a decidedly non-Christian cult.
Huckabee has been asked about this view that Mormonism is a cult. He dodges and dances. “If I’m invited to be the president of a theological school, that’ll be a perfectly appropriate question,” he says, “but to be the president of the United States, I don’t know that that’s going to be the most important issue that I’ll be facing when I’m sworn in.”
Hmmm. So it is an issue, Huckabee avers. But not a very important one. And he’s not going to pronounce upon it. Nice straddle…And by Huckabee’s own logic, since he is not running for head of a theological college, what is he doing proclaiming himself a “Christian leader” in an ad promoting himself for president? Answer: Having the issue every which way. Seeming to take the high road of tolerance by refusing to declare Mormonism a cult, indeed declaring himself above the issue — yet clearly playing to that prejudice by leaving the question ambiguous, while making sure everyone knows that he, for one, is a “Christian leader."*
And in case you’re wondering what left-wing publication that opinion piece comes from, it’s the National Review, a column by Charles Krauthammer.
In the context of Huckabee promoting himself as a “Christian leader”, it is quite relevant and proper to ask what he’s said in the past while leading his flock. Of course he’s not legally obligated to release his sermons. Mother Jones has every right to ask for them, and a lot of people would be interested in what he’s said. A guy who’s suggested that HIV-infected people be quarantined probably has made a lot of fascinating statements to his congregation.
Well, do you honestly expect Mother Jones to offer an unbiased analysis of his Sermons? Do you expect Hillary to agree to be interviewed by Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity? Do you expect the Republicans to agree to a debate moderated by Michael Moore or Markos Moulitsas.
Fair enough, Mike. Now, since there is room for disagreement about what the Christian faith means, let’s hear what it means to you. You could write some new statements on your faith, or, if you’re pressed for time, just hand out copies of what you’ve already said on the matter.
That could be, although we only have MJ’s report. Still, I don’t blame him for not releasing the sermons even though I suspect they’d be pretty benign. Why let your political adversaries quote you out of context, as you know they will? Hillary still hasn’t released her papers as First Lady, and those are probably even more relevant than Huckabee’s sermons. I don’t really blame her, either. Unfortunately, you don’t get to be president by being Mr. Nice Guy.
Thanks. I should have said that he needs to do the calculus of what he has to lose by not giving them out, too. Still, I think there is more to lose by giving them out than there is to be gained. At any rate, anyone interested in what he has to say can just read his book.
No, but any purpose to releasing his sermons are for evaluating his religous suitability for the office of the president. There also has been a long tradition where deeply held religous beliefs were considered private as far as the general public was concerned.
[stupidest comment she could have made about her programs].)