Dobson on Obama

James Dobson has come out with a ferocious and angry attack on Barack Obama with respect to a speech Obama gave almost 2 years to the day on the role of faith in public policy. I think it would be a great disservice to our democracy if either Obama's speech or Dobson's response are reduced to a few decontextualized snippets so I encourage anyone interested to read Obama's whole speech here or view the speech and Dobson's comments here.

Obama asks one simple question in this speech and gives 3 possible answers.
Question: “…how do we build on these still-tentative partnerships between religious and secular people of good will?”
Answer 1: Understand BOTH the role of the separation of church and state AND the “robustness of our religious practice”
Answer 2: Translate religiously motivated concerns into universal terms to facilitate dialogue.
Answer 3: “Any reconciliation between faith and democratic pluralism requires some sense of proportion...on both sides.”

Now some of Dobson’s critiques (excerpted from Time) and some passages in Obama's speech that those critiques ignore or read thinly:
Dobson: "I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view, his own confused theology.... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."
Obama: "Even those who claim the Bible's inerrancy make distinctions between Scriptural edicts, sensing that some passages - the Ten Commandments, say, or a belief in Christ's divinity - are central to Christian faith, while others are more culturally specific and may be modified to accommodate modern life."

Dobson claims Obama, who is pro-choice, is attempting to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality," and has "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution." "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?"
Obama: "Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all."

Tom Minnery (also with Focus on the Family): "Many people have called [Sharpton] a black racist, and [Obama] is somehow equating [Dobson] with that and racial bigotry."
Obama: And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's?

Some thoughts:

1. It is clear from the speech that Sen. Obama is a liberal-progressive; but one who believes that faith should have a role in the public sphere. A large portion of the speech is spent chastising secularists for not recognizing American spiritual vitality.
2. I find it surprising that Dobson could not find one good thing to say about the speech even thought the general gist of the speech validates the role of faith in public discourse.
3. Why is Dobson so offended (according to Minnery) by being in the same sentence with Al Sharpton? Obama’s point was exactly that their versions of Christianity are so different that there would be a need for dialogue even if there were only Christian’s in the US. The basic point, and I encourage you to read the whole speech, is the need for religious tolerance—a basic desire for those religious minorities who had fled Europe’s religious persecution from other Christians.
4. I agree that Obama is inartful in phrasing his seeming attack on literalist interpretations of the bible. The need for believers to interpret original dictates should not be framed as the seeming unreasonableness of the original text. However, there’s a point here. Religion involves a translation of the edict into real life.
5. Sadly, there’s a possibility that the discourse of the role of faith in the public sphere is going to be reduced to (i) abortion and (ii) gay marriage—just two of the many issues that people of faith should concern themselves about and two issues that I think have been used to manipulate people of faith for far too long. I think it would be a disservice to our democracy if we cannot discuss how people of different faiths and no faith at all can dialogue in the civic space.
6. Happily, I think this is an opportunity for all people of faith to expand the discourse of faith and politics.

Image: Getty Images via NPR.
Update I: Kirbyjon Caldwell, the Methodist minister who married George W. Bush's daughter has started a website, "James Dobson doesn't speak for Me" with point by point refutations of Dobson's claims.

Playing White House

As a visual thinker, I've been the greatest fan of the Obama graphics design team. Their newest effort to design a seal for Obama doesn't work for me, not because their design skills were insufficient but because the idea of making a faux Presidential Seal just doesn't make any sense. It doesn't match the gravitas of the real seal and it almost seems presumptuous to claim the trappings of the office before earning them.

Image via CNN.

Upadate I: Happily, CNN reports the Obama Campaign have seen the foolishness of their ways and yanked this rotund faux pas.

Moveon.org's Waste of Money

Am I the only one who finds Moveon.org's anti-McCain extremely irritating? The lady comes off seeming whiny and privileged. What about something that's a little less shrill and more dignified? By the way nobody wants to send their baby to war. Who is this supposed to appeal to? West Virginians? I don't think so. It sounds like left-wing activists preaching to other left-wing activists. A waste of money if you ask me.

The Black French on Obama

The NY Times has an article on the impact of Obama's candidacy on blacks in France. French blacks are disillusioned by the official race-blind policy in midst of racial disparities. From reading it, it seems to me that its really about people starting to listen to what these people--black French intellectuals and activists--have been saying before Obama's candidacy. However, the candidacy seems to give fuel to the fire. Also, I'm not sure a return to negritude is the answer.

The article mentions French-Cameroonian writer, Léonora Miano and Patrick Lozès's advocacy group CRAN.

Obama on Black Dads

So Senator visited Apostolic Church of God in Chicago to give a "lecture" on what it means to be a Father. To be honest, I have often made the remark that the main issue that needs to be addressed in the African American community is the disrupted family structure--disrupted for many historical reasons but disrupted for sure. I have also believed that there has been a vacuum in leadership in the Afro-Am community and that Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson need to address this issue aggressively. (This by the way was one of Jeremiah Wright's messages). If Sharpton and co. were doing that, then Obama wouldn't have to make this speech. To that extent, I think Senator Obama's was on point and the speech was important and necessary. I do think certain phrases were unnecessary, e.g. "any fool can have a child." True but impolitic. BTW, I am very happy that Obama didn't shy away from going to another black church. I believe these churches are doing important work and that Trinity should not be a synecdoche for the Black Church. Black churches are diverse and should be seen as that.

Anyways, the main question is how is this speech interpreted by (i) the African American community (ii) the Mainstream Media (iii) Conservatives (iv) Ethnic Whites. There has been an interesting range of responses in the blogosphere. Some will read this as an effort to appease white voters who believe that blacks are solely responsible for their uneven progress. Others, on the other end of the spectrum will see it as a much needed act of leadership.

Black commentator Ta-Nehisi Coates has just written a book, The Beautiful Struggle, about his own exceptional father so I was quite interested in finding out his take would be on this. Here's an excerpt,

Here is my beef with how this is already being reported. Barack Obama is basically touting a message that you will hear coming from any serious black person in any black community. Louis Farrakhan was saying this shit thirteen years ago, but I didn't hear anything about Louis Farrakhan offering "a strong rebuke" to absent black fathers. That's because this isn't really about black fathers, or black families. It's about Barack giving voice to white frustration. That's not a reason for Barack not to say what he's saying. He did it in front of a black crowd, and it was the right thing to say.

Here's a video of Obama's remarks.

Al Gore On Board

Speaking of Recount, Al Gore's to endorse Obama today. As Kevin Spacey's character in Recount says, "I'm not even sure I like Al Gore," but he's certainly reinvented himself as global statesman and an important voice.

Revisiting 2000

Got free HBO over the weekend and got to see Recount! I think they did an excellent job of creating a sense of suspense. Watching it, I have to say, it would have been useful to have some Clinton cut-throat politics on the Gore team during that political "street-fight." As per the film, the Democrats were completely out-hustled and I had no idea the Supreme Court played that much of a role in changing the course of events.

Excellence on the Course

Okay, this has nothing to do with politics. But it has to do with perseverance and excellence. Just watched Tiger Woods outlast Rocco Mediate and post-knee surgery pain in playoffs then sudden death for the US Open. Great golf and a little diversion from the political field. I kinda miss Senator Clinton. Hopefully, the McCain-Obama competition will be just as exciting and raise excellence in the political field.

Quote from Rocco Mediate, "I threw the Kitchen Sink at him."

Great Loss

A great loss of a giant of the political world, Tim Russert. His show, during this political season, was one of the highlights of my Sunday. A lesson to all of us to live and work passionately whatever our station in life.

Obama's Baby Mama?

Fox continues its unbelievably racist attacks on Michelle Obama. Watch the banner on the screen where she is described as "Obama's Baby Mama." I'm beginning to suspect that we are going to see some really ugly aspects of America before this is over. Source Salon.com

Terrorist Fist Jab?

So Fox decided that the fist bump between Barack and Michelle Obama before the victory speech last Tuesday, and I which I discussed in this post, could be interpreted as a "terrorist fist jab." By the way, what is with Fox and this Body Language BS.

Candidate's Folk Beliefs

For all the folklorists out there, especially those interested in the epistemic violence performed on African folk beliefs, you'd be interested to know the candidates are folk belief practitioners. See these pictures of the candidates lucky objects from Time magazine.

Concerns for November

NY Magazine has an article here about the weaknesses of the Obama candidacy from a supporter's point of view. I too had been meaning to put such a list together. I haven't read Kurt Andersen's piece through and through but one concern that I share with him is Obama's occasional cockiness. This was most evident for me when he said today he would whup Congress if they didn't pass health care reform. Said as a joke, but it doesn't quite play well to say that just as they've laid down their crowns at your feet to nominate you. Andersen writes,

True humility is a disqualifier for winning the presidency, but the appearance of humility can be essential, and Obama’s surpassing self-confidence can come across as preening self-regard.

T.D. Jakes on Obama

I don't know what Bishop Jakes stand has been during the campaign, which is actually a good thing because I believe ministers should protect their congregations from politicians but he has written what I think is a wonderful commentary on CNN.

I congratulate Sen. Obama on this historic accomplishment. I thank him for accepting the torch that was lit by our forefathers and proudly carrying it through the darkness of our struggles, trials and tribulations, bringing light and hope to a new generation, and for facing all those who said "No" and "You can't win," or "It will never happen," and firmly, proudly, defiantly saying, "Yes I can!"

I congratulate not just Sen. Obama on his victory, but the country on this landmark event that has shattered a past all too often filled with reasons to separate us as opposed to a voice of reason to unite us. The victory cup does not rest on the shoulders of the senator alone, but to all those who have been able to lift the conversation from petty racism, antiquated cut-throat politics, and fear-based campaigns to the larger issues of how we would like to see our country led into the future and ultimately how our country will be remembered.

For me it was almost déjà vu as I sat with my son. I remembered a little over 40 years ago watching the famous King speech with my dad. Similarly, I watched with my youngest son last night as a historical moment unfolded. He and I saw the dreams of slaves come true as the sons of slaves and the slave owners clapped their hands in one progressive sweep. As I drifted into sleep, all I could see was the twinkle in my son's eyes. His eyes were illuminated with possibilities, and his heart was filled with the potential of what is attainable for qualified, competent people of all types who prepare themselves intellectually and are well vested with a divine sensitivity to the "fierce urgency of now!"

Politics of the Absurd

More on this later, but how can you ask to be Vice President when you won't even acknowledge that the Presidential candidate has won? Secondly, Bob Johnson who accused the candidate of taking drugs and Lanny Davis, a disingenuous person if there ever was one, are hardly the ones to make the case. People like them are exactly why we don't need a Clinton in the White House.

Dissent with Candidate Obama

As an ardent Barack Obama supporter, let me be the first to STRIDENTLY disagree with this butt-kissing of the Israel lobby group AIPAC by Obama, Clinton and McCain. I can honestly not think of any other group before which the candidates have to go prostrate themselves and swear allegiance in such a naked manner. I truly believe that this belittles America's stature, her greatness, and her independence.

In his statements before AIPAC, Obama makes no acknowledgment of the intense sufferings of the Palestinian peoples. Speak truth to the SPECIAL INTERESTS like you said you would Mr. Obama! My thoughts on the Middle East were expressed in a post here.

Visit Open Secrets for disclosures on the group's lobbying influence.

Update I: The moment that made my heart jump during this speech was Obama's forceful statement about the final status of Jerusalem. Middle East 101, this is one of the KEY pieces of a final settlement of the crisis, meaning, you can't settle it unilaterally or away from the negotiation table. I believe this was a major foreign blunder by Senator Obama. Not even the Bush Administration has gone so far. You don't throw out major policy changes like that out to get votes!

Well, surprise surprise, Obama has had to backtrack. I hope he's not about to prove Hillary right and show he doesn't know what the heck he's talking about. Glenn Kessler writes:

The Bush administration's official position is that the status of Jerusalem is among the most sensitive issues and must be decided by the parties. Former President Bill Clinton, before he left office, had proposed a formula under which "Jerusalem should be an open and undivided city," including locating the Palestian capital in East Jerusalem.

Obama quickly backtracked today in an interview with CNN.

"Well, obviously, it's going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues. And Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations," Obama said when asked whether Palestinians had no future claim to the city.

Obama said "as a practical matter, it would be very difficult to execute" a division of the city. "And I think that it is smart for us to -- to work through a system in which everybody has access to the extraordinary religious sites in Old Jerusalem but that Israel has a legitimate claim on that city."

More room for Republican attacks on inexperience. Can we get Dennis Ross on the Obama team anytime soon? I'm really nervous about Obama overcompensating in his attempt to woo Jewish support.

Power Couple

Okay I missed the visuals of the speech; I was working on a paper so I had to settle for the audio. I heard there was a Barack-Michelle fist bump! I've been scouring the internet trying to find the video. This picture from Oliver Willis.

Update I: Okay, I finally caught the video on CNN. No one told me the fist-bump was followed by a pat on the future first lady's ass! That should get him the James Dobson vote.

Update II: Trust CNN's Jeanne Moos to catch unto this.

Update III: Watch the lady's of the view discuss the moment.

Heaven...

...on earth

Clinton Supporter's Outrage

Yikes! Here's an angry Clinton supporter at the recent RBC deliberation on Michigan and Florida. What to do? I guess this is the danger of identity politics. It also shows how much responsibility Hillary Clinton has to help such people gain closure by exiting the race in a dignified and conciliatory fashion and why Harold Ickes statements at the meeting were quite irresponsible. Video comes via Truthdig.